On this Friday edition of Radio Ranch, I’m joined by co-host Brent Allan Winters for a wide-ranging, listener-driven conversation on asking the right questions and grounding civic life in first principles. We open with current anxieties in markets and politics, then pivot to the enduring habit of clear thinking: Brent unpacks the Good Samaritan account as a lesson in framing the question properly, and we trace how that insight connects to common-law due process, juries, and limits on state power. From there, we get practical: land vs. real property, the lore (and limits) of “allodial” title, the purpose and history of property taxes, and why reform-minded efforts often fail without addressing root process and jurisdiction. We also touch case law and recent legal shifts that shape the civic landscape (Dobbs and the end of Roe, the Chevron deference rollback in Loper Bright, and Judge Posner’s Moore v. Madigan concealed-carry ruling), along with resources for deeper study—Magna Carta to Blackstone, and textual scholarship from Van Til to Wallace and Ehrman. We close with program logistics and listener Q&A on trust law, sovereignty claims, and how to stay oriented to process over outcomes in turbulent times.
- 'Global Voice Radio Network – Radio Ranch': https://radio.globalvoiceradio.net
- 'CommonLawyer.com (Brent Allan Winters)': https://commonlawyer.com/
- 'EuroFolkRadio (anchor platform mentioned)': https://eurofolkradio.com/
- 'FreeConferenceCall.com (show call-in platform)': https://www.freeconferencecall.com/en/us
- 'Barry County Sheriff – Dar Leaf (referenced by Brent)': https://www.misheriff.org/sheriffs-offices/barry-county/
- 'Declaration of Independence (National Archives)': https://www.archives.gov/historical-docs/declaration
- 'Magna Carta (UK National Archives resource)': https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/magna-carta/
- 'Sir William Blackstone – Commentaries (Online Library of Liberty)': https://oll.libertyfund.org/people/sir-william-blackstone/titles
- 'Geneva Bible (1599) – online text (eBible.org)': https://ebible.org/enggnv/GEN.htm
- 'New American Standard Bible – The Lockman Foundation': https://www.lockman.org/new-american-standard-bible-nasb/
- 'Didache – early Christian manual (English texts, Wikisource)': https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Didache
- 'Gospel of Thomas – English translation (Nag Hammadi Library/Gnosis Archive)': https://gnosis.org/naghamm/gthlamb.html
- 'Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (SCOTUS case summary & opinions, LII)': https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/22-451
- 'Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (SCOTUS, Justia summary/opinion)': https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/597/19-1392/
- 'Moore v. Madigan (7th Cir. 2012) – concealed carry (Justia)': https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca7/12-1269/12-1269-2012-12-11.html
- 'Cornelius Van Til – Westminster Theological Seminary (historic faculty)': https://wm.wts.edu/faculty/cornelius-van-til
- 'Daniel B. Wallace – CSNTM / personal site': https://danielbwallace.com/
- 'Bart D. Ehrman – official site': https://www.bartehrman.com/
- 'Shroud of Turin – Official (Sindone.org, Archdiocese of Turin)': https://sindone.org/en/home-english/
- 'Country Joe & the Fish – overview (Apple Music artist page)': https://music.apple.com/us/artist/country-joe-the-fish/32279454
[00:00:21]
Unknown:
Morning, Paul.
[00:00:23] Unknown:
Morning. Forward moving and focused on freedom, you're listening to the Global Voice Radio Network. This Mirror Stream is brought to you in part by mymitoboost.com for support of the mitochondria like never before. A body trying to function without adequate mitochondrial function is kinda like running an engine without oil. It's not gonna work very well. It's also brought to you by snapphat.com. That is snap,phat,.com. It's also brought to you by the Preif International terahertz frequency wand through iterraplanet.com. Thank you so much for joining us, and welcome to the program.
[00:02:28] Unknown:
Good morning, kids. Here we go again on the Old Radio Ranch, Roger Sales. It's the Friday edition with cohost Brent Winters when he I may be here already. Anyway, I think it's the November 14, about not too far away from that big day here. Big biggest holiday of the year. And, so here we go. November 14, Radio Ranch, Roger Sales, I got, and Brent Winters, I got my stuff out of the way. Paul, would you please be so kind just to identify and, the people that help us extend our reach, if you would, please?
[00:03:05] Unknown:
I can do that for sure. Thank you. Good morning, Roger. You sure? Yes. Yes. Our anchor platform is eurofolkradio.com. That is thanks to pastor Eli James. We are on radiosoapbox.com, Tuesdays through Fridays, so we're on that platform as well. We are on, Global Voice Radio Network. Radio.globalvoiceradio.net is our audio platform, and our video platform is rumble.globalvoiceradio.net. Our website is thematrixdocs.com, the matrixd0cs.com, and, free conference call is how people join us on the show. And all links to Eurofolk, Global Voice, and FCC are on the website.
Get out. That's about all I've got.
[00:03:59] Unknown:
Yikes. Do I see Brent up there? So it looks like he joined us. Yeah? Yes. He did join us. He's still muted, but he is there. There he is. Doctor Winters is what they ought to call you. Well, here we go. Going into the big weekend. Boy, there's a bunch of stuff happening, and, you just don't know, honestly. Brent, how are you doing this morning, my friend? Good, Roger.
[00:04:22] Unknown:
Paul sent me a link and asked me to listen to it, and I did. And he wanted, requested that I comment about it. I'm not in any hurry. I want to do it because he wants me to, but, there's other things you want to talk about. Maybe we ought to make a good ready as I used to say. I you know, I get up to speak and you hit your belt up and you shuffle your papers around and you say a few stupid words to try to get yourself out of the way before you can concentrate on what you're supposed to say, you know. But, if there's there's something else you'd like to talk about, we can do that.
[00:05:03] Unknown:
Oh, I don't know. There's much happening, Brent. I'm, I'd just throw it over to you. I know you don't keep up with the news. It's just a bunch of hogwash political stuff probably, but we're reaching some kind of a point that's been building for a long time. I e, earlier this week, I think, Monday, general Flynn, highly respected. You You know, he's not gonna come on there and BS you. General Flynn got on Alex and said, I've never gotten on with the sense of urgency that I have. And, and he says that we are going to experience something within the next ninety days. Now that's coming from general Flynn. K. I can see the other things. I was thinking about you this morning. Do you remember ever listening and hearing a guy named Bob Chapman?
No. Does that ring a bell with you? No. Uh-uh. No. He's gone now. Fortunately, he was big gold and silver guy. He owned the largest gold and silver brokerage house on Wall Street for almost thirty years, lived all over the world. And he used to get on the radio and tell you what's really going on, and died doing so, by the way. He was on his death bed. He was doing broadcast. Pancreatic cancer, I believe. But Bob Chapman used to say, you say, you'll there'll be a day when you'll see gold go up and down a $100 or more in a day. Uh-huh. Well, we saw it, didn't we? It's doing it right now. It's doing it today.
Yeah. It dropped a 100 a 100 and something dollars this morning. And, so evidently what's happened with the metals is there was this, run run up here just a short while back, couple of months. Mhmm. And, it ran up. That's when it ran up to, like, 4,500, and that overshot the the real price. And so there were profit takers, and now it's getting back up to that. Now get this, Brent. We talked about this earlier. Mhmm. Oh, what's his name? The guy tell you. My brain. He's very respected in the gold and silver industry. I just I can't believe I can't think of these names. He was on, and he was doing an interview with a gal named Judy Shelton. I don't know if that name rings a bell with you. Probably not. Right? Mhmm. Mhmm. No. She's a big gold bug that, Trump was touting. He had two of them, a male and a female when this is the first term, and he was trying to get her on the Federal Reserve Board. Well, they're trying to do the same thing again. Judy Shelton's very plugged in, but she was on this, on on this interview and said she said it on other interviews.
President Trump said on July 4 year, the two thousand two hundred and fiftieth anniversary, he's gonna revalue gold. Evidently, Trump made that statement. Mhmm. So, there's some exciting things, sitting out there. Now the problem is when they revalue gold, it'll get rid of some of the debt. It'll make some of us who had the foresight to buy it a while back and sit on it. It'll make us happy, but the rest of the world is going to be in in in a in a hell of a hand basket right at that point, unfortunately.
[00:08:13] Unknown:
But you can't do anything about it except try and protect yourself and you can't help others if you're not strong. Okay? Yeah. Yeah. Can't save the world if you can't pay the rent. That's, very true. A quote from, I don't know who said it. Morton Blackwell said it. That's the one I remember.
[00:08:29] Unknown:
But that's the way it works. That's right. True. So, anyway, we do the best we can. That's all happening. We're very fortunate in many ways to be alive and cognizant and cognitive here on these, forces and these things that are happening and playing out right in front of us because they're they're been wanting to live right now for thousands of years, man. Yeah. And behind it no. I I agree. It's exciting. Behind it all
[00:08:53] Unknown:
is something that's come to a head that I I like to stress to people because people's minds don't habitually go there. They ought to, but they don't. That what and ask yourself, what are the springs of all that's happening? Because there is a common spring of Yes. All human activity. Van Till made this point. Van Till was a was a, people called him a philosopher because they don't like the word, theologian, but he was professor of theology at Princeton for years. And, he was born on a dairy farm in Indiana in a Dutch community, Cornelius Van Till.
And after all of his years of teaching, a very measured man. I mean, he he was one of those kind of fellows that, the people in the highfalutin German theologians and philosophers were afraid of. He was that kind of a fellow, and people said about Van Till everything that he believed was in every sentence he wrote. He was one of those kind of guys. He was articulate to where you never had any you were never lost reading, but you had to really concentrate and stay with him. But you if you look close, you were never lost when he would say things. But Van Till made this point after all of his years of looking at the world and history and teaching. Of course, as a teacher, you get a lot of input from students because students come in fresh, don't know their backside from a $17 sunbonnet, and they ask easy important but well I should say, yeah easy, but questions that people that are academics often overlook.
That's the beauty about teaching if you if it's worked right. You're you're getting questions from people with fresh minds that are asking the obvious thing. I remember when I was in high school, they used to send the army around, and they'd get all us students in the auditorium. There were it wasn't like there were a lot of us, but we did have a little auditorium place. And then they'd send in somebody from the army, and they'd try to talk us into the whole they'd try to persuade us that what we were doing in Southeast Asia was right, and then, of course, persuade a few of the guys to think about trying to get in the army army somehow in the officer corps, join up or something.
I remember the fellow made a pitch. He was an army officer, very articulate and sharp looking, you know, and got all done. And, Betsy, Betsy Diller, her father was an oil man. He was an oil driller. And Betsy was, and still is, as far as I know, sweetheart of a gal. She just raised her hands and said, yeah. But she said, are we winning the war in Vietnam? Simple question. Nobody was asking at that time. And I thought even then when I was young, I said, wow. Why didn't I think of that? You know? Are we winning? We're we're there to win. Are we? Are we there to win? Maybe we aren't. Maybe that was the problem. Well, that was the way Van Till was too, and that's the way young people are. They just ask the question that has to be answered. And if you don't ask the right question, you're shot at getting the right answer. It's pretty slim. Yeah. Jesus Christ made that point when he said to the lawyer, he said, he he said, how do I enter the kingdom of heaven? He said, well, you know, you're a lawyer. You tell me. Jesus Christ said, you tell me, big boy.
And the boy said, the lawyer the law sharp, I call him in my translation. Law sharp said, love God, love your neighbor. And Jesus Christ said, well, okay. Whatever you think, that this do and you shall live. You think you can really do that? Of course. You can't do that. And you screw up once and you're guilty of all, he said. So he just let the man he want to he wanted to rest upon his morality to save him. That's Jesus Christ said, have at it, buddy. See if it works out for you. Jesus Christ never said God has a wonderful plan for your life, and here's how you get saved. He never said that, ever. And the reason was because he knew, being the maker of heaven and earth, that, for a man to be safe and from hell, he first has to come to grips with he first has to come to come to grips with the idea that he can't be a good person because he's not a good person. And if you don't come to grips with that idea, if God doesn't slam you down on your knees, if you're not to the point you're kissing the dirt, well, you'll never come to that conclusion. Well, so how do you do that? Well, you throw a man back on the law.
Because when you throw a man back on the law of God, if he is, able, he will see that he's not even coming close. I talked to a lady once, a friend of my friends. She had been raised in Arden, Roman Roman church. Her ardent Roman church family. They were immigrants in our part of the world. Her father was a coal miner. He came there to work in the coal mines, and they were of that Hopish persuasion. I remember talking to her when I got older and she treated me like her own son. We we I loved the woman and she loved me. That kind of thing. I was her boy's best friend, you know. And so she took care of me. But a discussion about keeping the 10 Commandments. I said, Do you think you can really keep the 10 Commandments? Is that what you're depending upon to safen yourself from eternal hell?
She said, Yes, I do. Well, I liked it. That's now she's gone now, but that's the height of arrogance, just between me, you, and the fence post. That's the height of arrogance. And that kind of that kind of attitude, God's not going to wink at. He's not going to put up with that. And he does. Attitude, God's not going to wink at. He's not going to put up with that. And he doesn't. Well, anyway, this lawyer asked the question or or that he said to the lawyer, threw it back on him. He said, love God, love your neighbor. And he said, this do and and thou shalt live.
If you're gonna be that stupid, you're asking the wrong well, then he said this. The lawyer said, yeah. But he said, who is my neighbor? Now that was the wrong question. And Jesus Christ points that out in spades. Jesus Christ makes the point to the fellow that ought to know about ought to know better that if you don't ask the right question, you're not even gonna come get no closest answer answer. When I was in law school, I used to try to go to the med school was across across this quad and on the other side, and it was a research med school. I'm pretty highfalutin place, but I would go there to study. You only get one exam in law school. You only get one exam at the end of the semester. And if you don't pass that exam, well, you're screwed. I just get one shot at it. So I'm over there, and my one shot's coming. I forget which class it was. Well, I just couldn't study around. I'm I'm one of those kind of guys that I like to talk to people too much, and a man that has too many friends will come to ruin.
A man that has too many friends will come to ruin. That's from the bible book of Proverbs. That's the way I was in law school. I had too many friends, so if I was going to study, I had to get away from everybody and I'd go over there. I didn't know anybody at the med school. I go there once a semester, and I'd study for the exam. I was sitting in there in a cubicle, and there was another fellow on the other side of the cubicle. I didn't know him. He was in the med school, I guess. Pretty big fellow. And he was there for a few hours. Finally, he said, you must be studying for an exam. I said, yeah. I am.
I'm over to law school, and I'm trying to study. And, I said, what are you doing? Yeah. I said the same thing. I'm studying for an exam. Well, I said, well, I bet you got a lot to do. He said, well, I suppose you're like me. You gotta memorize a lot of stuff. I said, what do you mean? He said, I'm I have to memorize every over 200 bones, and I have to no. I have to memorize all their Greek names. The Greek name the medical medicine shot through with Greek term because of our and because of the writings of the Greeks on the subject and quite a few of them by the way. Well any rate, he said I suppose you got to memorize a lot of stuff too. And I said no I don't got to memorize nothing. He said, you don't? He said, what are you studying for? I said, well, what I have to do be able to do on my exam is ask the right questions. I don't have to give the right answers, but I gotta ask the right questions. And if I don't ask the right questions, then I don't get any credit on the exam.
He said no kidding. I said yeah. I said it's been quite a quite a paradigm shift for me to understand that life is all about asking the right questions and that's exactly what Jesus Christ told this fellow. And by the way our common law traditions likes that too. You've got to be able to ask the right questions to live in this cruel world. And if you don't get into that mindset, you're just going to continue to be a screwball. And your life's going to be miserable. More more it's going to be miserable. And well, I shouldn't say that. Life is full of trouble. You're going to have trouble, but it'll be, to the degree you don't know it'll ask the right question. Well, bet Betsy Diller asked the right question.
Old Betsy, and what a gal. She just said, why are we winning? That's simple enough. The right question's a simple question. We don't have to get complicated about it. You don't have to be an academic. You don't have to study logic to ask the right question. That's the beauty of Christianity. Well, Roger, are you gonna say something? No. No.
[00:18:25] Unknown:
Just sitting here listening. I want to hear what the answer was. I was going to say though, if you ask the right question, you also better know the definitions of the words that are given you as an answer.
[00:18:38] Unknown:
Oh, well, sure. Sure. But we've got to get to the right question first. I guess we can get to that some later. I don't want to miss talking about what Paul wants me to talk about too, but getting back to that. So Jesus Christ said to this law sharp, he said, well, what do you think? You're the smart guy here. He said, love God, love your neighbor. Oh, okay. But then he was trying to trying to it says he he was seeking to justify himself. And then he said after the text says seeking to justify himself, that's always a bad thing to do, by the way. Justify yourself. Nobody cares. Did you know that? I'm talking to everybody, not you, Roger.
Nobody cares, about justifying yourself. God certainly doesn't care. And matter of fact, it just ticks him off and it'll tick off your mother and your father and anybody else you're responsible to growing up. They don't wanna hear you to justify yourself unless they ask specifically, and you're able to articulate it. But by and large, those that have authority over you like God himself, he just wants you to shut your blasted mouth and do what he tells you to do and think think it through, and you'll figure it out after you learn how to obey after you learn how to obey. But, you first have to discern and ask the right question. Well, he said to this lawyer, what he had said. Oh, yeah. Then the lawyer says, well, bear you out, but who's my neighbors? In other words, all he was saying was, I'm gonna justify myself by defining things a certain way like I want. You know, whoever, as you mentioned, Roger, but coming back to the question, whoever defines terms wins the argument, say. So that's what this smart aleck was trying to do.
He was trying to to define terms with the maker of heaven and earth and the giver of the law. That's Jesus Christ. That's what the bible says. It's not said often enough, but that's what the book says. Well, he said, well what do you mean? And he said, I have done all these things and I'm a good guy. That was the idea, you know. And Jesus Christ said there was a man. There was a man, some man, a certain man the text says. It could be translated certain some. A man, a certain fella went down went from Jerusalem going from Jerusalem to Jericho and he was on the Jericho Road. You see the Jericho Road runs from up higher elevation Jerusalem down toward the Jordan River going east and it's a it's a pretty straight shot. We'll have to go through the mountains that winds your hand a little bit. And a lot of a lot of brigands hang out on the Jericho Road.
And, this fellow was going and he going along, and, the brigands, the robbers waylaid him, beat him, it says, half to death. The word there half to death means he was on the very brink of death. Now we learned, for example, I remember learning that, once your body temperature reaches a certain point going down, and I think it's 87, long in there, that's the point of no return. And if it gets below whatever that point is, somewhere down in there, then it's all over but to cry. And you can't bring a man back. He may be he may live a while longer, but it's all over. Well, the word that, Luke and by the way, and this is fascinating. Doctor Luke, the physician, uses a word there from the the the from a medical term of art to describe a man who is at that very point of no return.
The medical term. And he's the one that recorded that book and he said he was on the he was on the, right half dead half dead zone. That's I guess that gets it pretty good, but along comes this, half breed. You know, to be a half breed is to be somebody that is in great derision with the people around him. In America if you were a half breed anything at one time it was pretty bad. People wouldn't have anything to do with you and that's the way it was with these Samaritans. They were half breed Israelites, half breed Israelites, and they lived in a place called Samaria. The Samaritan comes along.
However, the priest comes along, then the Levite, and of course they passed by on the other side, didn't want to get near him because he looked like he was dead. The law of God says don't get near a dead body. Don't touch it. So they went on the other side. It's not where it's not that they did something awful wrong. That wasn't the point of the story. That's what the law of God said, and they really believed that. And by the way, that's what the law of God still says. Don't be touching dead bodies. It's dangerous. Dead animals, be careful who does it and how. That's it tells you how to handle that stuff, but the law of God, the law of God, it's eternal.
And when I was on the farm, I was careful. We'd have to bury livestock, cattle, pigs, dog, you know, whatever's dead, whatever got tore up by a coyote or a wolf or whatever. And, we were very careful not to touch the dead bodies. It's just stupid to do that. Well, that's what they did. And then along come the Samaritan, and he sees the fellow over there, the half breed. All the Israelites hated the Samaritans, and well, they were half breeds, and they lived over there by themselves. They didn't go to Jerusalem. They worshiped in Mount Gerizim and all those kind of things. But the Samaritan stopped and poured wine and oil into his wounds and bound up his wounds and put him up on his own little donkey and took him to a nearby inn and gave him to the innkeeper and said take care of this man and I come back I'll pay you what I owe you but you know nurse him back to health if you can. And then Jesus Christ after all that says now listen this this is the point.
Who was neighbor? He asked the law sharp, who was neighbor to him who fell among thieves. Now that wasn't the question the law sharp asked. You see the law sharp said who is my neighbor? Well, that's the wrong question. You got to ask the right question if you're going to get to the right answer. And the right question was in that story, who was neighbor to him that fell among thieves? Well, the law sharp didn't want to answer the question cause it was too painful. Finally, he begrudgingly and again, the Greek text makes it clear using words that make it clear that he begrudgingly mumbled.
He did he wouldn't even say the word Samaritan. That like, that's like getting a dirty taste in your mouth. So he said, he who had mercy on him. He kind of mumbled it. That's the words used there to indicate the mumbling of this guy who wouldn't say Samaritan. He wouldn't justify himself. Well the question the the point of the story and I shouldn't say story. It's something that really happened. It wasn't a parable. It's called the parable of the Samaritan or the good Samaritan. It it it wasn't a parable. And the reason you know it wasn't a parable because every parable starts with a simile. It'll say something like the kingdom of heaven is like or as the kingdom of heaven is like or as a man who bought a field. The kingdom of heaven is like or as a woman who lost a coin in her house. The kingdom of heaven is this the like or as, but it doesn't say that. It says a certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho. This was something in the news, something they heard about. And when a fella gets waylaid in the mountains around well, you know, it was that way in in, Virginia City, Nevada back in the days of Silver. They all know the roads coming in were dangerous, and if anybody got killed or way later robbed, if if they got back to town, they'd spread the news. And and, of course, then the posse go out looking for them. Well, that's the way it was in Jerusalem. That was a hilly, lonely road going to Jericho. And they knew the news. They knew what had happened to this fella. He was talking about something in the news when Jesus Christ said that, but he pointed out by without saying it, he said, you've asked the wrong question. The question in life and I've I get real practical about that for myself and I have the question in life. When I first saw this I said, wow. I'll tell you what I did. The question in life is not who is my neighbor so I can justify myself and go help my neighbor.
It's not Christianity is not a moral order. No. No. No. No. Christianity is an order about who Jesus Christ is. He'll take care of the morality and he'll work it out for you. Whatever you think morality is. Matter of fact, the word moral doesn't appear in the bible any place. Morality, moralist, moral. Why? Because it's a word that means custom. It doesn't even mean what is an eternal standard. And God's all about law, not morality. Morality is you can make your you can make a dog well, I'm gonna go that far, but let me get back to the point. So the question in your life is not who is my neighbor so you can go help him and justify yourself by being a good person. The question in life is who is neighbor to him that fell among thieves? Now who who is the one that fell among thieves? That's you. You're the one that's beat up. You're the one that the the law cannot help.
It's not that the law is bad. You shouldn't touch dead bodies. No. That's true. It's that but that can't that will never get you into eternal safety, the kingdom of God. That will never do that. The law is not there to do that. The law is there to bring to bring conviction to the non Christian man and to give a guidance for a decent life to the Christian man. That's what it's there for. But it will not bring you into the kingdom. That's what God does. So who was the Samaritan in the story? If the guy that's beat up is you, who the Samaritan? Well, just before that, they'd been calling Jesus Christ a half breed Samaritan, the product of a of a Samaritan whore and a a Roman soldier at the local garrison. That's who they said Jesus Christ was. And still do. And still do. Yeah. And, but they have worse things to say than that. Well, it's written in the Talmud.
How half breed of Samaritan is bad enough, but they, they got worse things to say. But at any rate, that's true. That's true. But at any rate, he, they made that accusation against him. He said, okay, here's a Samaritan. He helped this guy. See that that really he wanted to get their attention. He was Jesus Christ is the he's not a Samaritan, but in the story, the Samaritan represents him because he of the of the order of Melchizedek, which is above the order of of, Levi, he has the power to save a man from hell, and he did. He he did what was necessary to bring that about, But he didn't he kept the law perfectly.
That's true. And if he hadn't have done that, he would have been the perfect sacrifice, and he still keep the law perfectly in thought and deed. He is god immortal immortal. And having done that, he is the Samaritan. And, but he says to us as a practical matter, ask the right question. So I, when I first saw that decades ago, I said, wow. And by the way, that's not a new point. I mean, the church has been teaching that for decades. It's just that most of the church doesn't pay attention. So when you hear things about the parable called falsely called the parable of the Samaritan, people say, Oh, well, that means that, I'm supposed to help my neighbor. And my neighbor is anybody that needs help. That's hogwash. That's not even true. But as a matter of fact, you can't even do that. And if you're stupid enough to do that, you're gonna get yourself in a lot of trouble. Jesus Christ never said that.
Just we as mere weak mortals, we want to justify ourselves so bad. We're trying to find some way we can be good little boys and girls and make God love us, and that ain't gonna happen either. Your dad and mom do not love you, never did love you because you did everything they said. They love you because you were the air the the the the babies of their own bodies, as they say in Northern and then they say in Yorkshire. And on up into Scotland, you are their you are your parents' barons. I say that for the sake of Paul in case he's listening. I want him to know I'm trying to learn his dialect a little bit. The barons, that that's short of contraction in the old country for born ones. Born of my own body. That's what g that's what the bible calls that's what the bible calls us in the book of first John, my barren, my born ones. That's a good translation just that us Americans don't know what it means.
I try I put it as just born ones, but that's who we are. We don't we don't gain favor with God because we're good and or bad or no. We have favor with God. He wants us to do what he tells us to do, but that's not what puts us on solid footing. I'm I'm on solid footing with my father because I'm his son. Period. Do you really think that my father's always been happy with me? I can tell you right now there's a lot of things, and as he'll be 100 years old in a few months, and he's still there. And there's a lot of things he's disappointed very disappointed with me about. But I'm still my father's son, and that's obvious when he talks to me.
And that's the way it is with you, friends. Get out of these evil legal systems. Is the law important? Yes. For decency of the Christian man, as I've said, and for condemnation of the non Christian man. That's what the law is for. But it will not safeen you from eternal hell. Now that you know that much, you maybe can understand the parable. And that was the parable of of the of the, not the parable. Here I am saying it. See, the evil empire will the evil empire and the useful idiots out there of the a lot of preachers will twist that into a moral story. You know, there's not one parable or story. Not one parable or story that Jesus Christ ever told to teach a moral lesson. Not one.
Every one of them was to teach more about who he was, and that's what that that, story of the Samaritan is about, teaching who he is. He is the savior, the only one who can safe him forever. And he is the Samaritan in that story, even though he wasn't a Samaritan. He was making fun of him. And he was he was condemning the man who was not asking the right question. You gotta ask the right question to get to the right answer. Well, Roger, the other thing that's come up, then it's all over. I mean, it's exploded.
[00:32:47] Unknown:
I'm sorry. Roger, go ahead. Yeah. Oh, I wanna ask a question. What was the answer to to her question if they were winning Vietnam? Do you remember?
[00:32:54] Unknown:
Oh, no. He hummed around. I remember that. He never answered the question. Good old Betsy. I shouldn't say old Betsy. She was a peach of a gal. I could tell you a lot of stories about her dad was an oil driller. I've told the stories about him. He he was something else. Clever, clever man. Well, no. Never did answer the question. And, of course, to answer the question would have been embarrassing to try to answer it because the policy there wasn't to win, as you know. The policy there was to contain and all the foolish things that happened and and the despair we saw, I bet we all Yeah. Those of us that were there. I don't think there were any metrics to decide victory. It's just like
[00:33:35] Unknown:
craziness
[00:33:36] Unknown:
for years. Yeah. And they were just making a lot of money. I mean, the simplicity of it was Yeah. I guess. LBJ's wife, Lady Bird, was a large shareholder in Bell Helicopter. Right. That's just one thing. And of hundreds of thousands of people making money just and young men dying. As one fellow said, I think, I don't know who said it, but we never lost a a major battle in Vietnam. But that doesn't make any difference. Now my brother told me, just on the side note here, he went to the naval war college a hundred years ago, and he came back and I said, what'd you learn?
He said two things. Well, what are they? Well, number one, all other things being equal, absent an act of God, numbers always win. More equipment, more arms, more men, that always wins. And of course he said the exception is an act of God and that has happened a lot of times in history. And the battle of Tours France would be one place when that happened where the Islamic fords were stopped. And that was not expected to happen because they had the numbers. But, without that, numbers always win. Number two. Number two, any war fought for anything other than dirt will come to nothing.
This this is this is, profound to me. I mean, it comes right to the heart of the Bible. The Bible is all about land, all about land. The trust settlement of God is all about land, the entrusted property, the land the Lord our God has given us. That's all it's about. Now that will bring us to another point. But right now, just to make the point, Vietnam wasn't fought for dirt. They weren't fighting for dirt. They weren't taking territory. And we, right or wrong, we went to war with Germany, but we fought for dirt. We took the territory.
Right or wrong, when Japan it was we were after dirt. We hopped the islands till we got there, and then we said we want the whole blast of caboodle, unconditional surrender, nothing less. And we did. We took we took the place. We took over. And then when things, settled down, we turned it back so they could go ahead and live their lives, an act of magnanimity. But it has to be for dirt, and in Vietnam, we weren't doing that. We were they were telling the boys in Vietnam we've got to win the hearts and the minds of the people. No. We gotta kill our enemies and take dirt. And if we don't do that, we're going to waste lives, blood, and treasure, and enemy and and and our enemies won't be defeated, and that's exactly what happened. That's exactly what happened. Land. And God says everything in his book. He tells us this. Everything relates back to his land. He is the allodial landlord and there's nothing in the Bible that does not relate directly to his established trust settlement with us as beneficiaries, his elect, as the Bible says, is chosen, and beneficiaries and trust settlements are always chosen by the seller.
I I don't have to explain that. First, we establish the fact of the matter. The fact of the matter, you take the evidence and you establish the fact of the matter. And once you do that, then you can move to try to explain it or understand it. But right now, it's important that I believe. I believe all I know that Jesus Christ said so. When he make the declarations, that's the end of it. That's called a decree. It's called a dogma in the Greek. That's a Greek word. That means I'll tell you the way it is without giving you any reasons right now. Alright. We only have two dogmatic, two dogmatic institutions in our universe. One of them is the maker of heaven and earth.
And all judgment right now has been given to Jesus Christ, by the way. By by a power of the Godhead, they gave all that to that member of the Godhead. A second is the jury. God established the jury on Earth, a 12 man jury, and gave them the power of dogma, the power of arbiter. That means that their decisions are not are not once they've made their decision on the facts of the case, that's the end of it. It's not even appealable. Of course, even our Constitution of The United States says that amendment seven. Why? That's our common law tradition. That's why it's a Christian tradition. Well coming back to asking the right question, that's the important thing. And here's the right question with respect to what is now dominating the world, not just America, the world.
And that is the question about the state of Israel. So there's a lot of questions are being asked. It's dominating right now, no question. I can't avoid it. And it's gonna be more so. It's just growing. I don't know, Roger, that it could be much more so. I think it's it's it's conclusive at this point, and there's two reasons for it. Well, that's conclusive. Even the question the the right question is not being asked even by those that are right headed. That's in my humble opinion. And the question is, who is Israel? Who is Israel? And if you can answer that question right, everything else falls in place. We just follow from that answer, but that's not being done. Now go ahead, Roger. They don't want the answer to that. Well, obviously not. It's getting to a point where there's a clear cut line of demarcation.
[00:38:52] Unknown:
And the question is, are you an Israeli firster or are you an America firster? And it's the it's the battle for the future of the Republican Party. And I dare I say from the pollsters and stuff I listen I've see on, you know, talking about this that Trump's rating has just absolutely stepped off a cliff in the last two, three weeks I understand. With the younger people especially.
[00:39:19] Unknown:
Yes. Yes. And here's what's happened. We have a younger crowd that are, just they're, unexperienced because they're younger. They don't know what the older crowd knows. They don't have the baggage, the conscience baggage they have, and they're just asking simple questions just like Betsy when we were in high school. Well, are we winning?
[00:39:42] Unknown:
I didn't
[00:39:43] Unknown:
when when when miss Betsy asked that question, that was a turning point in my life. And I said, yeah. Miss Betsy's right. What what what's going on here? And I've never never quit thinking that way about that particular part of American history. I I like the question. Instead, are we winning, I like the question, what are we there for? Well well, that was that was a big one too as you remember. Yeah. It was a little country Joe and the fish. One, two, three. What are we fighting for? Remember that? Yeah. Don't know. Don't give a damn. Next stop is Vietnam. Yeah. Five, six, seven. Open the pearly gates. Don't need to wonder why we're all gonna die.
[00:40:21] Unknown:
Thank you, country Joe. Hold on. Hold on, Brent. Yes, Larry. Good morning.
[00:40:30] Unknown:
Good morning. I've got two questions for you, Brent. You mentioned the low deal title. There's Samuel often talks about that we can't achieve a lodial title, that it's a lodium. What's the difference between a lodium and a lodial title? And the next thing is, I listened to your first presentation on the common law. I mean, on the, on the trust class Mhmm. The other day, a couple days ago, and you mentioned that that there's two types of property. There's immovable property and movable property, and Mhmm. You used a couple of words to describe that. One of the words is the immovable property, like land. You refer to it as real something.
And, you know, there's this guy that was going around. I believe he he's deceased now, but he was going around in Florida, and he figured out how to get, I guess, a lodium title so so you don't have to pay property taxes in Florida. And one of the things he did was he he figured out that on the property records, they are they are ascribing a definition of real estate to per you know, to home properties. And what that does is it's, causing it's causing, you know, you to have to pay property tax because if you own real estate, that's a commercial term. And so by getting rid of that term real estate and, off the property rolls, you're able to achieve what he calls a lodium title. So I was wondering what your thoughts are on all that. Is it okay to call something real estate?
[00:42:21] Unknown:
Well, real estate is a it's a term, common law, real property, and what it is, it's distinguished from land. They're both the same thing, but then within the within land, there is real property and land. And real property is a word that, that, signifies developed land. In other words, I've built a house on it. I've built a livestock barn on it. That becomes real estate, but that's not a hard fast distinction. And to get caught up in that kind of minutia, like you're talking about that guy in Florida, just silliness. And while I find it, I I I the older I get, the stronger I get about that, just calling things silly. What I find about that in most cases, and I don't know who the fellow is and I don't want to demean anybody, but I want to point out if I have the opportunity, don't waste your time.
You're not you. I mean, anybody. I'm just speaking. When you ask questions, I I talk to everybody, not just the person who's asked the question. So I'm not criticizing you for asking it. I like I'm glad you asked the questions, and then we can talk about it. But, people that do that, they they come across and they become gurus of sorts. And now that way, no. What they've done is, in most cases, they just know a lot of minutia, but they don't know why, and they're not connecting it to any any universal. And all that minutia not connected to a universal is meaningless and it'll lead you into madness.
You know, you Where? You keep the main thing the main thing as Jesus Christ said, you you Pharisees have omitted the weightier matters of the law. The weightier matters, and I don't care what you call it or what and all that minutia and the names you give it and the distinct you draw, doesn't mean anything. If you've not captured or the weightier matters of the law haven't captured you. Now I, I'm a lawyer. I don't go into court and worry if something if there's a bureaucratic problem, I I immediately brush that aside and I go to the fundamentals.
For example, just brush it aside and go, wait a minute. This guy has a right to remain silent. That's a fundamental. Wait a minute. This guy has a right to a jury trial. That's a fundamental. Why? And then I wanna know why. How? Why? Elodial title. People talking about elodial title is only elodium. Elodium is a Scandinavian German word. It's from our common law tradition. A Germanic is a better word, Scandinavian Germanic word and Celtic word. All the same people, different tongues. The Celts have a very much different tongue. Nobody knows why, but they do. But they, they had what they called the, the Aled. That's the land itself that, is owned by, who has a lodial title.
A a lodial title is to an alad. The word oolodium, just another, root word, and to try to draw fine distinctions between things like a lodium, that's just silly. By the way, a lodial title historically among our, among the people of our culture, that's going back to those tribes, only belong to the to the sovereign only. You say, well, I'm the sovereign. No, you're not. You're not the sovereign. And that sovereign movement, sovereign man on the land is dangerous and false. It never it never existed. There's only one sovereign, only one sovereign, and that's the maker of heaven and earth. And the other sovereign only acts Roger, I'll I'll stop just a second. Okay. I know. I wanna let you talk. I don't wanna try to over override you here. But one more thing. No. The the sovereign, as I mentioned a while ago, the sovereign is the arbiter. There are only two in the universe that God has authorized. One is himself, the Godhead, and the other one is the 12 man jury. And that's only down here on land. That's it. That's sovereign. And the expression of sovereignty comes in our common law tradition, through, the, the Godhead, two institutions, the Godhead, that three, three person panel and the 12 man jury. That's it.
Boy, the simplicity cut and get, not, not talking to you again. You asked the question, but just, we need to get off all of my new shit and get back to fundamentals. When I teach those courses, I try to major on. Okay, Roger, go ahead. Well, I was just gonna say, I got this out of the old real estate book. The word estate means less than true ownership. Well, that's, that's a French. It's a French word. Yes. And it does mean that's the law of French. The Normans brought it to England. Estate means less than two ownership, true, true ownership, unless you're talking to the sovereign. But let's think with us beyond, does, does any, any of us who have fee simple title to land like a house or what, farmland? That mean we have absolute absolute unlimited right to do anything we want on that land? And the answer is no.
Affirmatively. Shouts. No. You can't murder somebody on your land. It's against the law. And just to make an obvious point, I all title, down here on land is subject to the elodial landlord. And the elodial landlord is Jesus, the Christ that shouts throughout the Bible. That's why he came. That's why he, he he, gave up his life to pay the penalty for our law breaking so that we can join with him in that. Not only as trustee, not only as beneficiaries but as under trustees. But every trustee, even Jesus Christ himself, there's a limit.
There's a limit that he has from his co equal members of the Godhead as to what he is supposed to do and not supposed to do. And we as under trustees of land, real estate and land, we are limited by the terms of our trusteeship. And that's why it's sometimes called stewardship. In our common law tradition, our common law tradition is not arithmetic. It's not algebra. It's not equations that are cut and dried. No. Not even a little. You look at the words in our common law tradition, they just kinda flow. Why? Because we're men and God gives it to us that way and it's all about evidence. But getting back and words are important. Yes. Of course, we lose the meanings of words. We lose our lives, liberty, and our property.
But, the fixed meaning of a word never changes. But the range of meaning is usually pretty broad. How it's used with that fixed meaning still being intact. You learn that in bible translation. Without that, there's no limit to anything. There has to be limits to words and the fixed meaning. Oh, Paul wants to say something. I know. He's chomping at the bit. Go ahead, Paul.
[00:48:52] Unknown:
Yeah. I I think who, Larry is referring to is Steve Emerson. And what he did was he poured through the, codes of Florida, and he found a statute that stated that they cannot tax a person's residence unless it is in used in the furtherance of a business or a commercial activity. And then through the definition of real estate, they, have impugned the definition of commercial property on everything. So what he did was he went in, and he rebutted the fact that they were claiming he was operating a business when in fact he wasn't.
[00:49:33] Unknown:
It was And I will predict I will predict nowhere with those arguments. Now and I'm not saying it's not right. I'm just saying there's got to be something more to it than playing a goofy game, going to a bunch of codes and trying to parse everything like it's a algebraic equation that'll never work. It doesn't work. It doesn't work on the course. The judge judges don't even know what you're talking about. It's a waste of a man's life to do that. And we had a guy back with a tax code. What was his name? He went to jail for quite a long time. Nice fella. And I'm not, no, it wasn't Schiff, but, and I wouldn't, and he's a smart guy, a nice guy, and I'm not against people doing that if it helps. But as a general thing and to be, you're wrong headed to think that's gonna help. You know, Larry Beecraft made the point of his life to know more about the internal revenue code than any man alive.
And he does. And of course he practices in that area of law, but I'm, I'm making the point, what has that got? What has that got us? There's got to be something bigger than the the the puny, goofy statutes of 435 political hacks. I mean, you take like we say, boys, let me say it all, my mother and them say, you got one boy, you got a brain. You got two boys, you got half a brain. You got three boy, three boys, you got a third of a brain and all and so on. Well, you got four thirty five political hacks. You've got one four hundred and thirty fifth of a brain. And I don't say that lightly. I was full bore and in the political arena running for office and I'd got a serious taste of what that does to a man. I mean it, you, you may as well put your brain in a five gallon bucket and fire a 45 slug into it. These fellows and they're in the gals, they're there in politics. They've only got time to do one thing and that's campaign.
No, they don't have time to contemplate. They don't have time to read books. No, that's not part of it. That's why they grow stale. That's why they get to looking weird. That's why Nancy Pelosi is out of her mind. She's lost her mind. It was never there to start with my opinion. She was wrong headed, but after all those years, the things she's saying and doing, even showing herself naked on the internet, she's nuts. What? That's what it'll do for you. That this is dangerous business that destroys your personality.
[00:51:48] Unknown:
Damn. Don't even give me that memo. That's that's the stuff of nightmares.
[00:51:52] Unknown:
That's the stuff my nightmares are made of. Oh, that's why Anyway, Steve is Yeah. According according to Steve Emerson, Brent, it did work for him, but what he had to do was he had to sit down with the tax assessor, and he had to know enough about the code and know enough about the law to be able to immediately rebut verbally everything that that tax assessor tried to pull out of his butt. And he was successful in doing it, and he was also successful in showing his friends how to do it. So he's got, like, a Goodbye. Like, an entire block that are not on the tax rolls, but he's never made a claim that that gave him, a right in the property.
[00:52:35] Unknown:
Well, if he can show me proof of that, maybe. I've never seen proof of it, and I've heard I've been around it for thirty, forty years of patriots doing that kind of stuff. And I say and then they come up and say, well, that worked for me, and I did this, and then they'd make a lot of money to well, I wanna see the proof. And if I can't see it, I'm not gonna buy it. But Well, it ain't gonna do him too much good when DeSantis if he gets his property bill passed down there where nobody has to pay it anymore. Well, that that's a good idea. And that's where we need to go in that direction. And the people that are raising Cain about it, like Emerson, I'm all for him raising Cain any way he can. I'm just talking as a matter of law. What I'm telling people don't I would tell people don't waste your time beating your head against the wall. We need something bigger than that. Listen, Christianity is not about this is Christianity.
They're not about reforming anything. It's about replacing everything. We gotta be more radical and say, well, I'm gonna get my name off it. No. No. No. There has to be just a a fell swoop of reality and it's coming. It seems I can feel it in a lot of areas. You know, who would ever thought that, the new supreme court would reverse Roe v Wade almost unexpectedly? Whoever thought that the federal circus would start to say, well, if you if you, if you're not a if you're, a non violent felon, you didn't, you don't lose your, second amendment rights. Right. Who'd ever thought those And it's happening more and more. I see it. Who'd ever thought that judge Pozner, a hardcore Jewish left wing judge would give the Illinois legislatures only 180 to pass legislation about concealed carry or, he'd do it for him.
I don't know that that's, the, the way to handle that problem, but his attitude changed for whatever reason. I don't know. You know, here's a good,
[00:54:23] Unknown:
example of the turnaround. You know, usually, when you unleash government with something, it just continues to grow. Uh-huh. Well, with last year's Chevron decision, we actually curtailed the the power they'd given to administrative agencies. They're going in and backing that off a little bit from their, any way they wanna go to what degree. So that, you know, there are a few good thing. That's pretty important right there really. Yeah. There are good things happening. And I know I I sound,
[00:54:51] Unknown:
I sound extreme and vicious sometimes. I consider talking here on Radio Ranch a bit of an in house discussion among patriots. And so when I say things, I'm not against anybody out there like mister Emerson or the fellow out in, state of Oregon that recently passed away, trying to do that. But then when I hear that they actually were successful, I've never ever seen any proof of that. And that brings me to another point, Paul, and I appreciate you sending me that clip about, the lost ending of the Lord's prayer. And we can go to that whenever you want to, but we're coming up the top of the hour, Roger, and we ought to
[00:55:31] Unknown:
let people know who we are, I suppose. Well, I want you to do that. I was watching the clock and trying to get you sandwiched in there, and I got a couple of minutes to freewheel. So Yeah. Why don't you go ahead and do that? And then I do want I've I've got an example and and a little more, a little more discussion on this property rights thing because people equate it with income tax, I think. Go ahead.
[00:55:54] Unknown:
Well, no. Well, okay then. My my name is Brent. Brent Allen Winters. Commonlawyer.com. Www.commonlawyer.com. And you can go to the website commonlawyer.com. You can, take the law classes we offer there. I try to teach the classes that I should have been taught in law school. And there are a lot of classes. I was taught in law school that were good common law classes. In fact, the first year was all common law classes. And it's been many decades now, and I've learned a lot about what I was taught and things that, should have been taught that wasn't. But then again, they didn't have all the time in the world. You only got three short years there.
But I try to teach those courses. You can go to the website commonlawyer.com, and I think there are a dozen or 13 courses that we've taught over the last many ten years or more. Some of them are very long. Some of them we took a year to teach every week. Some of them just twelve weeks. Some twenty three weeks. It depends upon the course. We try to keep them down to twelve. We taught that course on Magna Carta. That thing was over 50 presentations long. I got into it cause by cause and blow by blow, and I just couldn't stop. It was enjoyable. And and I, of course, I learned more than anybody when I teach the courses. And sheriff Darleaf, sheriff Darleaf and I from Barry County, Michigan are the presenters, and he's kind enough to be there. That helped put the rubber on the road. He's more practical than I am because what he does he he's a doer. He's a sheriff. He's out there doing things. I am too, but in a different I mean, I'm not worrying about somebody shooting me while I'm doing it as much. Oh, some some. I I worry about getting thrown to jail when I do what I do. And I've had that happen a couple of times.
You know, lawyers that are aggressive and we're on an adversarial tradition, Our common law is not inquisitorial like the rest of the world. It's adversarial. We go into court and we it's a fight. It's all about it was not we used to have, jury or, we used to have trial by battle, and now we have battle by trial. All the rules are almost exactly the same fundamentally anyway. And before the jury, it's battle by trial. And, we do that, but go there and and take those courses. We're getting ready, fix and do, as they say in some places, fixing to, teach a class on the declaration of 76 calls by calls and blow by blow, a common law document. Common law document, the complaint. But to go through it cause by cause and blow by blow is to see the organization of it, number one. But it's also to compare the law of the land, our common law tradition, with the law of the city, the canon civil law tradition of Rome. Because that's what our world was all about.
England was said that our common the common law does not apply on our American plantation. That's a quote from the first volume of Blackstone's commentaries on the common law. You know, all of us or not all of us you know what we can say about a lot of people, man, he's right headed. I'll tell old Blackstone. Bill Blackstone was right headed. He was so right headed that, the the legal profession in England, the barristers rejected him. He was one of them. He wrote those, or he those lectures put to writing and he was appointed judge. That didn't last long because he was overturned so much. And people said he's not a good judge because on appeal, he's overturned. Well, just the opposite was true.
The rest of the legal community refused to to go his way. He was right. But he did say this and here he was wrong. None of us are right all the time. He said, I'm quoting, our common law tradition does not apply in our American plantations. Plantation is a fancy word for colony. Our common law does not apply, and they believed it and then forced it with a vengeance. And that's why we went to war with them. Because if our common law didn't apply, that means we didn't have the right, the the duty to carry a gun. That means we didn't have, the right to resist an unlawful search and seizure. All those are common law doctrines.
That means we didn't have the right silence. That's a common law doctrine. It came to the always in our common law came to the forefront during the Protestant Reformation when the Roman powers and the the, the star chamber and the and the ecclesiastic courts were holding people in contempt, cutting off their noses, their ears, cutting their tongues out. A lot of blood was shed to affirm what had always been true in our common law tradition. These things I'm talking about, and that's what, the emperor of the British empire, king in England, emperor here said. And so we we didn't go after them. They came after us. We didn't go after them. They came after us, and we tried to defend ourselves.
And they finally got to the point that the only defense was offense. It took seven years. We really never attacked them even after seven years of the war. And finally, at the very end, the Cornwallis got cornered, and and they sprung the trap and closed the net. Well, we threw them out, but we did not attack them. We did not attack them. This was not a revolution. Well, at any rate, you can take those classes for appreciation of a donation. You can also get the winterized translation of the bible. A common lawyer translates and annotates from the original tongues. I say that with emphasis because people come back and say, well, what what bible did you translate it from? I translated it from the original tongues. No matter how much I say it, people keep saying that. I didn't translate it from anything.
I've been doing it for over forty years and for what it's worth, I do the target audience is me. If you wanna look at it, you can get it if you wanted. It comes in digital form and it's five volumes because it has over a 135 foot or, 35,000 footnotes. 35 over 35,000 footnotes. Over 200 long appendices longer than footnotes. Tracing major themes through the warp and the wolf of the bible. This is what I do. I've been doing it for a long time. That's pretty much all I do now. I wanna make it available to people if they want it. We're on the radio seven days a week. We have church on Sundays. Same thing on Saturdays. But, we talk about the laws of nature and the laws of nature's God. But if you go to commonlawyer.com commonlawyer.com, you can find all that stuff there. And by the way, support us. I don't practice law as much as I used to. I'm pretty much slowed way down. I just teach, but I teach a lot and I stay busy at that, but I can't do that.
Those that help me can't keep going unless you donate to us. If you don't donate to us, you think we're doing the right thing and you don't donate to us, you're gonna suffer for it. I say this in this way. God will bless you if you do what you believe is right. If you believe and if you don't believe I'm doing the right thing, don't worry about it. No. God moves people to give and I'm not begging. I'm just saying that if I don't tell you that he'll bless you for doing the right thing, well I'm not fulfilling my responsibilities as a teacher of the laws of nature.
That's our common law tradition and the laws of nature is god. That phrase signifies the bible. And the declaration of 76, we'll talk about all that too. Lord willing. Because remember the website, support us and this is Brent, Brent Allen Winters. And I'm here with Roger Sales of Roger Sales Radio Ranch. And Roger, of course, has a website. He doesn't talk about it as much. And a book he's written, by the way, too. I am not good at self promotion. I'm not either. I'm learning, Roger. I'm getting better. It's a pain in the neck. You wanna talk about your subject. That's what I wanna do more than promoting. Is that the way you are? Yeah. Pretty much.
[01:03:34] Unknown:
Well, I wanted to, thank you for that, Brent. I wanted to go back the one experience I've had with someone that said they had removed their property from the property rolls. Uh-huh. We in the Patriot community refer to that as a Lloyd Eel, if I'm gonna Murr. That's close enough. Right? I may I may mispronounce it Murr. Close enough. Title. And so this guy was a student of Al Atasque. Now you remember who he was, right, Brent? No. I'm out of the loop with some of these fellas. Well, he was this was back in the nineties. He's the guy I can tell well, I'm gonna have to tell two stories now. Mhmm.
He was the guy. He was in Texas. He was a roofer and got into all this with a child custody situation. Got to be very interested and very good at it, and he started he was about parallel to me in, Atlanta. He was in Dallas. A lot of people in Texas a lot of people know who he was, but he's still around. He hadn't demise, but he didn't have any profile. And he started a group there in Dallas, and he started a magazine, tabloid, a little magazine called the Anti Scheister. Do you remember that?
[01:04:47] Unknown:
Uh-huh. Go ahead. Yeah.
[01:04:49] Unknown:
Yeah. So Al would write a lot of those articles. He'd take contributing, people and whatnot. Well, this is one of his students. And I actually talked to the guy on the phone, and, he had some property. Somehow, he had achieved this in Oregon. And the way the story is, is that he was going to move Al out there. He was building a cabin on his land. Al was living in Fort Worth or something in what he described as a cat box. And, so the guy said, listen. If you wanna come out here, I'll let you live in the cabin. And, you know, it's not finished. Help me finish it. This, that, and the other. Al took him up on it, moved out there, and, they were just about finished with the cabin.
Al had moved all his stuff in it, and, they installed the hot water heater. And somehow there was a leak, and and the cabin caught fire. Mhmm. Well, they called the fire department, and the road was right next to where the cabin was on his property. And the fire department pulled up there, and they came down and said, well, we can't come on your property. It's not on the property rolls. It's not on the tax rolls. So the cabin burned to the ground. Okay? So what I tell people, should you there's a number not a number. There's a few people that have this as a goal. I understand it. And if you do achieve that, you better, like, once a year stroke a check to the fire department and some of the other things that you would be covered by your property tax payment. And I think that
[01:06:29] Unknown:
again.
[01:06:32] Unknown:
Hello? Could you please hit your mic there? Say hello. Could you please hit your mic, for a second, please? And, what I try and tell people is if you do achieve that once a year or so, you better go strokes, some money to these things like the fire department. So I'll say, listen. I'm I may be off the tax rolls, but if something happens, I want your support. Boom. So it's not a tax like an income tax. It's a tax generally that's mounted by bond issues that have been floated on elections for things that are local, fire departments, schools, etcetera, etcetera. Now I if you're older and you don't have any children of school bearing age, then you ought to be able to take that percentage of whatever your payment is and and put that aside. But it's generally a local oriented tax and not a federal tax. So
[01:07:31] Unknown:
I just don't I don't know if people have proper perspective on it, Brent. That's what I It it it's a state tax. It's not a federal. Land land is in the jurisdiction of the state. Mhmm. And then the feds have no jurisdiction over private land.
[01:07:45] Unknown:
No. That's a good point. Yeah. Well, here's the rub. Now what they're doing now, and it's evidently going on all over the country, is the assessment boards have been well, they did one thing. Instead of taking, like, for the school board, what the schools, were were gonna need for the next year financially, they're going in and going, how much do you need? And they're letting the entities say what the totals are they want. And that has thrown the whole assessment thing totally upside down. They're having a lot of problems with it in different parts of the country, and they're literally, with ad valorem taxes, just pricing the the the whole markets out of themselves.
[01:08:29] Unknown:
Well, I figured they would do that like the military would do. It worse now than ever before. Maybe doing it worse, but they're gonna ask. They're always gonna ask, well, what is it you want? And then they say, oh, we can't give you that much. And then they fight over it, the different entities. You know? I get what you're saying. Well, that that's, that's my thing on, these taxes, though, Roger. And unless I see proof of what you're saying, I'd say that rumors get started. And I say, but this is really true. I don't know that it is. You know? Oh, I I wanna go if you're not familiar with Al Haddish's experience
[01:09:01] Unknown:
there with the, Texas assistant attorney general Mhmm. And that story. I know some of the audience is. Al's kind of a legend, really. Because mainly of this. Mhmm. And so there was a company out there that made colloidal silver, and they had put the company in a trust. And the feds were going after colloidal silver. This is in the nineties. And they didn't come after him directly. They came after him through the state. Mhmm. And they, the assistant attorney general of Texas was personally handling this case. Mhmm. And he'd been handling it. They'd been dancing for five years. And so it was coming to some sort of a head. And at the last minute, the trustee appointed Al Adisk as the trustee, I believe. Mhmm. Mhmm. And so he was enjoined in the case.
And so he went and started reading. First thing he did was went back to the original legislation back to turn the last century. And he went to the original FDA legislation and found in it, it says man and other animals. And he went to the assistant attorney general for the first meeting, and he put that in front of him. He said, I'm not an animal. I'm made in God's image. Mhmm. And they after five years, $500,000, of personally, of a spent by the attorney general assistant attorney general of Texas, they folded their tent and walked away.
[01:10:33] Unknown:
Mhmm.
[01:10:34] Unknown:
Because I'm made in I mean, God's image. I'm not an animal.
[01:10:39] Unknown:
Well, here's the here's the way I'd look at that. Like the old fellow said, I didn't see that. I only heard. But just to be sociable, I'll take your word, and I'm not gonna quarrel with people who give testimony. But at the same time, if I'm gonna act on or promote it, I've got to have proof. And and, given testimony, that becomes popular testimony doesn't move me much just because I've had bad experiences doing that. I've never seen it. I've never seen anybody get all the tax rolls. I've heard all sorts of stories. I've even seen documents floated, you know, but that's why I say Yeah. Yeah. That's why I say, I don't I don't promote the idea because what we're doing in those cases and the other thing is this. We're just chopping around on the branches. And when you get caught up in the minutiae well, no. We need to we need to chop it out by the roots, and that's what Christianity is.
Christianity doesn't even reform the man. God is not out to reform anybody or any country or any government. He's out totally to replace everything. He replaces you to start with. He replaces you with a new man, a new mind, a new everything, and you're gonna get a new body, a new spirit, a new understanding, a new enlightenment. You're hearing things you didn't used to hear. You're seeing things you didn't used to see. You're understanding what you didn't used to understand because you're no longer who you were. You were an outlaw. When God brings you when he pardons you from outlawry, just like outlawry at common law, when you come back in, you come back in as a newborn babe, and everything you had before, all of your land and titles and prestige or whatever it was, offices, you start all over again. That's what outlawry is. That's what pardon is, a common law. When the president of The United States or the governor of your state pardoned somebody for a state crime, you come in as newborn babe. It doesn't it doesn't exonerate you and make you innocent. That's not the point of it at all. It's just saying we're giving you a new birth. The old man is guilty. This is outlawry. It's a picture of Christianity.
The old man is guilty, and we're pardoning the the pardon shoves him aside, leaves him in his guilty grave, and you're born anew. That's Christianity. And that's what he wants us to do with everything. We're not here to reform government. We're not here to reform the system. We're here to replace it with what with God's kingdom, to use the old King James word, his basileia, is, God's, arrangement. God's arrangement of scopes of jurisdiction. And and the hierarchy of how God has arranged authority. And, if you can see that, you're looking at the kingdom of God. You can't see it though unless you're born from above. I'm quoting the Bible. That's what it says, and I think there's truth to that. Well, Roger, not
[01:13:19] Unknown:
anything else you wanna say? No. I think we're we're simpatico,
[01:13:23] Unknown:
though, because I was just thinking why don't we open up the mic and see if any of the students or any listeners have anything to ask or add or discuss that they'd like. Well Larry, do you don't wanna Well, I don't wanna ignore Paul's request. So Paul Paul, you come in here if you can Okay. If I can do that. I mean, maybe I can talk about that in a little bit, and then we can open it up a little bit. But Paul, are you there?
[01:13:48] Unknown:
Yes. Yeah. I'm here. Yeah. Well,
[01:13:51] Unknown:
now you get me started, and I'll address what you wanna address about it. It was about the lord's prayer, wouldn't it? Okay. Yeah. Go ahead.
[01:13:58] Unknown:
I've always felt kind of empty at the end of the Lord's Prayer. I I always felt that, you know, from what I had heard about the the Amun Ra being the god of political, conquest, which, you know, we deal with day in and day out, really. And, it it just never felt right to me. And I did come across that video, and the one thing that struck me was with only 99,000 subscribers, within fourteen days, it had already had nearing a half million views, and that just doesn't happen. So and and I was I listened to it. I'd actually, I watched it a couple of times. And, what struck me was that they did show, Arabic words for they broke down each sentence, and they showed the Arabic, and then they showed an interpretation based on the Arabic.
And I didn't have firsthand knowledge of whether they were actually proven correct with that. And you know the only person that I know that is absolutely, positioned to verify the accuracy of what they said is you. And, I just thought it would be, an interesting thing to go through. And and I I don't get a bad feeling from that video. It, it doesn't strike me as being anything nefarious or anything that, is in compromise to God because it recognizes that God is the breath, God is the divine spark, God is, the creator, we are the creation, we are with God because without God, we are nothing.
And it actually pointed that out. So what are what are your thoughts on it?
[01:16:14] Unknown:
Well, first, thanks for sending it. You watched it twice. I watched it about one and a quarter. I went clear through it this morning or didn't go through it. I just listened to it. And, I assume you're asking because you think that I'll be candid and candid and straightforward. Yes. And, so I'm gonna do that. What that man said was exceedingly dangerous for one reason if no other reason at all. He's adding to the word of God. You know, you can add good things to the word of the sounds. Things that sound good it's still adding to the word of God. And there's not one sliver of evidence that that there's anything missing from the Lord's prayer and in the evidence of history.
And what we when we go to the manuscript evidence, and I looked again, I went back and looked. You know what? We can go to the manuscript evidence now on the Internet. I used to have to go to a library. It's hard to find one if I was back in the Midwest. I used to drive up to Winona Lake, Indiana. There was one library there that had everything that pertain to such things, and I could pull down portfolios of photographs, high resolution photographs off of the shelves and look at them as some of the major manuscripts. Well now I can go to the internet and do that and the resolution is even better.
But I can do that. It's amazing of course. I can look up summaries of it too. Now when it comes to the Lord's prayer, especially chapter the one there's two of them in the Bible. They're not the same. One's in Luke and one's in the sixth chapter of Matthew. That's the the popular one that people know, unquote. There's not any variations in the manuscripts that are avail that are that are known. And God has promised to preserve his word to us and, if what this fellow is saying is true somebody hid it from me. Of course he blamed the Roman church. You know it's easy to go back and this is popular among conservative groups, but it it's not true. Go back and blame Constantine for everything. The Seventh day Adventists blame him for making worship on Sunday. That's not true. Did he want it on Sunday? Well, he did it on Sunday. Does he, he's, is he the one that did it? No, he's not the one that did it. But boy, the people make that popular. It's all over the internet. And so you got these people trying to go back. They call it the Hebrew roots movement. Listen, if there's any the Hebrew roots movement is not Hebrew roots. That's Judaism.
You want to go back and be like a Babylonian Jew? Well, I'd I'd I wouldn't suggest it. I used to teach Hebrew, publicly, Terre Haute, Indiana, West Terre Haute specifically, but people all over it. I get these people I was on the radio then, so I had people come. I had a lot of people come. People would come, and they'd been to Jerusalem, the Wailing Wall, and they've got their prayer shawls. And then they'd do all this Judaism stuff. And I tried to be nice to them and not bust their bubble and say, look, look, Judaism is not what God ordained. You you can't that's not that's wrong. Why are you doing all these things? These things aren't in the Bible. They're certainly not in the law of God. And if they're not in the law of God, does Jesus Christ anywhere affirm them? No.
He denies them. All of them. Does Paul the Apostle affirm any of the practices of Judaism? No. He and he knew him better than anybody. I'm talking about the ugly stuff. And he he he denied it all. You know Paul the Apostle is kind of funny John the same way. Those guys knew Judaism. They lived in Jewry. They grew up in it. They knew what it was. But no place in the New Testament do any of them forthrightly get how can I say this, they don't even want to talk about it? And Paul the Apostle got one word for it, and he uses a word in the Greek that means, it's a in English, the only way you could translate it with any equivalence would be that four letter word that starts with s and ends in a t. The King James translates it dung, d u n g.
But it means human sewage is what it means. That's what he said Paul the apostle said it is. He knew it very very well. He didn't talk about it, but when you look at his writings and all of the writings of the New Testament, every doctrinal complaint they have is against some element of Babylonian Judaism. So to go back and look at that and and try to emulate it is what is called Judaization. The bible calls it that. It's the very thing that the bible says don't do. I've been to churches where people go and I don't know, they try oh, how let me back up. I'll get too far afield from the Lord's prayer. The Lord's prayer is the Lord's prayer. There's not one sliver of evidence that it's not all there. There's nothing in history. This thing that this fight fellow cites, the the Didache or the Didache. Again, I don't know how they pronounce it. I don't care to. I'll just do the best I can so you know what I'm talking about.
Most people that, are pathologists, put this at the end of the first century, the Didache. Didache. At the end of the first century, it's a very early document, at the beginning of the second. And they say that this fellow was saying, that Paul, you remember, that in that document there's something that's attached on the end of the Lord's Prayer. And then he cites also a false document called the gospel of Thomas. That's a false document. That's a fraud. And besides that, it has no the badges no badges of of being a part of being canonical, as we say, part of the Bible. But isn't it funny? People jump up and say, I found something in history that the church has ignored for 17 centuries, and it changes everything.
And they get 500,000 hits. Why? Sensationalism. That's like the shroud Shroud of Turin. It it's sensational. The he the mysterious numbers of the whatever they call it, the numerology books, it's sensational. It's the distant beat. But to be drawn to that, again, is to be drawn away from the evidence. All of life is based upon evidence and you won't live long if you don't pay attention to it. And every page and every phrase and every word of the Bible shouts about evidence. Jesus Christ talks, he talks about evidence. How often does he say, well, in the mouth of two or three witnesses, I testify, the spirit testifies, you testify, the three witnesses, that closes the case, let's move on.
I mean he didn't say it just that way but evidence is what life is all about and false doctrine is not paying attention to the evidence. Okay let's go to the manuscripts of the Bible. We our Bible is in and of itself evidence. It is the evidence of what happened and what God said, and it's the best evidence we got. It falls under the best evidence rule at common law, meets all the criteria, and the and the ancient document rule as well. When we're trying to see what the manuscripts of the Bible say, what the variations are, we look at the reliable evidence under the ancient document rule, which the the Bible talks about that. Our common law tradition has a well developed body of law with the ancient document rule and the best evidence rule. It's part of our law of evidence at common law. We use it in the federal courts, in our state courts, it's all over. And it's reliable, proven through centuries.
And the Bible undergirds all that. But the bible itself, it can be put to the test of that best evidence rule and the ancient document rule. And when we go to the fourth chapter of the book of Deuteronomy right there in the beginning of the books of Moses, it says do not add to and do not take away from God's word. Jesus Christ affirmed Deuteronomy, quoted Deuteronomy more than any other book. And Jesus Christ said not one jot nor one tittle shall fall away or be ignored of this law. It's a fascinating word in and of itself. Not one until all be fulfilled or as long as. He doesn't say it'll ever fall away, but he said for sure until it's all fulfilled, it's gonna stay.
And we're not to add or to or take away from. The last book of the Bible says it over again, repeating Deuteronomy, do not add two, do not take away, not one jot, that's the smallest of the 22 Hebrew letters, not one tittle. That's a serif on one of the Hebrew letters that turns, for example, a reish to a dalef. You change a letter, you've changed a word. You change a word, you change a sentence. You change the sentence, change the whole doctrine. And Jesus Christ said, we don't tolerate any of that. The Masoretes beginning back couple of centuries before the immaculate birth of Jesus Christ, not the conception of Mary, that's another unbiblical doctrine added to the Bible. You know, you add tradition to the Bible, you're adding to the Bible. You add another book to the Bible, the Talmud, the Mission of the Book of Mormon, the Watchtower of the Jehovah Witnesses, take the Science and Keys in the Scriptures, the Mary Baker Eddy, Christian Science. You add books.
Friends, that's simple. You're adding to the Bible. And when you add to the Bible, you're watering it down, and you're taking away because when you add to it with inevitably, what what happens? Well, people will pay more attention to what's added than they will the Bible. You add tradition to the Bible as Rome does and Lutheran church does, the Greek Orthodox church. The as a practical matter, it's on an equal level whether they say it is or not. It is. And but when you put it on an official equal level, the Bible has a way of receding from consideration in all those cases. Ain't that true? Of course, it is. People know about the traditions of Rome. They take the mass, holy unction, all the stuff they do. Bible doesn't mean anything. I interviewed a Roman priest once one time, nice fella.
He wanted to come on. His buddy buddy said, I want you to go talk to Brent. He's on the radio and morning show. The guy calls me and I knew where he lived. I knew where the Roman church was. And he said, well, if I come real nice fella. He said, if I come, just I want you to understand I don't know anything about the Bible. Now this is a Roman priest. After a dozen years of higher education admission. Yeah. And I appreciated him saying that. Hey, honest guy's honest. He didn't know squat about the Bible. Why? Well, because the traditions of his church, the Bible recedes from consideration in their education. What is number one in their education?
Logic. Thomas Aquinas, official doctrine of the church. Well, logic is like the the law sharp in tenth chapter of Luke. He wasn't asking the right question. And Thomas Aquinas, you gotta have start with the right fact and they don't do that. They, they get that wrong because they're wrong headed to start with because their doctrines are wrong. It's law of the city. If you're in that world, the Bible recedes from consideration. The Bible is the final arbiter. God's heaven and earth, the the final arbiter of right and wrong in the sky and on the land. The Bible is final. And you, my friend, individually, without anybody else, will have to come to your own conclusions about it.
I can of course, the Bible says that God has given teachers to his people. If I'm here teaching and you think I know something, I may coach you one way or the other, but you're gonna have to make the decision, not me. And I'm not here to make it for you at all. I can't do that. Not my not my office, not my business. My business is to bear testimony to what I know for sure. After I can say this. Yeah. After forty five years of intense Bible translation, after forty five years, I tell you what I think I've discovered. If I don't know and I think I still don't understand, it's my duty to say I'm speculating at this point.
[01:28:16] Unknown:
But I don't know. Kind interrupt just a second. There was some kind of major, discovery historically. Our, I think over there in Israel here last week, I didn't get the story. I just saw someone refer to the headline. Mhmm. But you may wanna look around in that area.
[01:28:35] Unknown:
Well, thank you, Roger. No. I keep up with those things because I do have unanswered questions. If someone wants to talk go ahead.
[01:28:43] Unknown:
Oh, so Brian, why do the, the newer translations drop the end of the Lord's prayer, the doxy, the kingdom, the power, and the glory for it?
[01:28:57] Unknown:
Oh, well, and, of course, I don't know the answer to that. I haven't talked to them. But the the evidence that we have the evidence we have of what the lord's prayer is is in the manuscripts. And there are manuscripts, that means written by hand, manu. That's the old word for handwritten before the printing press. Then some of those go back right to the first century almost. We have a fragment of the gospel of John that goes back that far. We have others in the second, third, or third and fourth centuries, and then on up through to the printing press. And, about 6,000 of them, by the way. Almost 6,000 for the New Testament alone.
And, we have an overwhelming, veritable embarrassment of riches and evidence, and the evidence is incontrovertible, undeniable of what the Bible says. Are there variations? Yes, there are. But on in the Lord's but there's no variation that changes anything. And I get that from scholars that say they hate the Bible. Bart Ehrman from Chapel Hill, North Carolina teaches New Testament language and literature. And he he said, well, there's not any very and he knows. He studied under under Medscare at Princeton. In the twentieth century, he was the man that was held up as the fellow that probably knew more than anybody. He's gone now. But Bart Ehrman was his PhD student. And Bart Bart hates the Bible, but he says there's not any variation in the New Testament that changes any Christian doctrine. Well, I I I think I could say it stronger than that. And I again just say that having having worked in the New Testament for forty five years intensely. And I come to these little variations, maybe a misspelling of a word. That doesn't make any difference, obviously.
The addition of a particle that stresses, emotion, and there's some of those in the in the you know, it's funny people say, if you learn one if you learn how to use the Greek article and rec can recognize the Greek definite article, like, we have the, that's a definite article, you've learned one seventh of the New Testament words. Well that's probably it doesn't mean much, but that's probably true. But I do know Dan Wallace. I don't know Dan Wallace. I know that Dan Wallace did his PhD on the Greek article. It was that it's that important. And And it does mean a lot. You can't always you can't translate it into English every time and make smooth translation. Although I found I think I found a way to do that. I don't make it smooth, but I can make it readable. I don't wanna leave it out. When I look at the English, the winterized version, I look at the English translation.
I wanna know what the Greek is. So I find a way to get it in there, and I know how I do that. So there it is. Every word must tell, and it's important when you translate, I believe. I think it's only, yeah, it's the only way it can be. You're not supposed to every jot and every tittle is important. I when I translate, I must make sure that every word tells and that the force of every word is felt in the translation somewhere, somehow. We can't go much further than that until we try to do that. You say, why was it left off in the modern translations? I I don't know what they did. I I didn't know King James has it. The New American Standard has it. Geneva Bible has it. I can't keep up with all the translations that are out there trying to make money. And I I don't know what's left out of, but I do know this.
To say that there's something beyond, for thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory forever, there's no evidence for that, that the Didache case mentions those kind of things. But we all and and that doesn't mean it's not biblical, what the Didache says. A first early century document, which clearly is a a document that is before Rome. Rome didn't really rise to glory and power really until the eleventh century. That's when it really came on like gangbusters. Before that it was there, it was very strong, and its doctrines had gone awry. That's all true.
But Constantine wasn't the one that made that happen. He was the one that welded it to the government and the the complete fusion that means that the the church Christianity was there in his mind to support and undergird his power. That's true. That did happen. But to say that Constantine decided what books would be in the bible and all that, there's not a a sliver of evidence of that either. Of all the count the councils that he convened, nothing is there that says that. There are things there that say that these are the that says, well, here, we recognize these are the books of the Bible that are being used in all of the churches.
We have we have record of that, but nowhere do we have record of, okay, we're gonna throw this one out and put this one in. We don't like this one and we like this. No. That didn't exist. That didn't happen. There is recognition recognition of the books of the Bible that are being used in all the churches, the consensus throughout Christendom that really happened. Well I've I now I've gotten gotten far afield maybe the Lord's prayer, but a lot of things I can say by the way that guy Paul, that thing you sent me, that fellow that did that talking, he's slick. Made me think of this of the serpent in the garden himself, had a beautiful smooth voice playing that nice music behind. He said a lot of things that were true, and you mentioned some of them some of them yourself.
And even the things he said that he added were true, but then he'd say things like this, and he'd say it quickly and in passing. He'd say, you are divine. Now wait a minute. What do you mean by that? I'm divine? No. No. No. God is God. He is creator. I am a creature of his creation. There's and you made that point Paul. You know, you absolutely said that's true, but this fella when he was talking, he would slip little things in like that. Well, you're gonna add to the Bible without evidence. There's something wrong with you. That's that's the scary thing. And then he cited the gospel of Thomas as though it were true. It's not. It's it's a fraud.
And there is is no evidence, no badges of good evidence that it is true. Well, that's Paul, did you have something you wanted to add to that?
[01:35:09] Unknown:
No. And I did pick those out too. I did pick those out too. It did it did have, like, little little, nuances of, a Christ, consciousness and all that. It it kind of almost tried to to balance on that bleeding edge between Yeah. Religion and new age philosophy.
[01:35:37] Unknown:
You could feel it then. Okay. I feel better about you, Paul. I was afraid. Yeah. And I felt that too. Okay. We're on the same page. And the other thing that he said was that, shucks. I forgot. There were so many things. I didn't write them down. But, yeah, there were a lot of he slipped a lot of stuff in there like the snake did in the garden. He slipped a lot of stuff in there. Go ahead, Paul. Well, Paul, unless you have something else to say, I I do wanna give people time to and and Roger did, to talk. Roger,
[01:36:06] Unknown:
KTM is over there. Yeah. I'm here, and I I know some of the audiences. You you you you do with them what you and I do is you you say something, and it
[01:36:16] Unknown:
spurns something in their brain. Yeah. Well, I'm that way too. Yeah. That's why this is enjoyable. It wouldn't be otherwise.
[01:36:24] Unknown:
Yeah. And profitable, I hope. Go ahead. Well, I'm just gonna say anybody in the audience wants a good question for Brent, me, Paul, whatever comment, line of, of ex explanation you'd like us to explore, Star 6, and the floor is yours. Hey, Roger. Be so there's Larry again. I was gonna say, Lou may not be so curious after all. Go ahead, Larry. Larry's always got questions. Do you did you get the other two answer?
[01:36:57] Unknown:
Oh, yeah. I did.
[01:36:58] Unknown:
Okay. So the, Brent, when when you're a boy, did your parents and, like, did the people that lived in in your county, did they pay property taxes? And it almost sounds like what you're saying is there's nothing real we can really do about having to pay property taxes. It's just a it's just a fact of life unless, like, in in in my case, living in in in Florida, unless there's a constitutional amendment that's at it with a 60% vote by the people to get rid of homes and all they're trying to do is get rid of homestead property tax. All the businesses and Airbnbs and and commercial properties, they all still have to pay taxes.
It's just the homestead, properties, which only make up for, like, around, I don't know, 30 per 30% of all property taxes paid. DeSantis is just trying to get rid of those property taxes because he doesn't believe you should have to be paying rent to the government. In other words, they could just come in if you fail to pay your your property tax that they could put a lien against your property. And then if you get into default, they could just come in and and seize your property. And he doesn't think that's right. And he uses the analogy that if you go buy a TV or a car, you pay a one time tax. You're not paying, like, a yearly tax to own that TV or car.
And, he says and this is your home we're talking about. So that that's what's given him this, this persistence to get rid of this this homestead property tax. But when you're a kid, was there property taxes, and where did this all originate from?
[01:38:51] Unknown:
Well, thank you. That's exactly what I wanna say. I'm what I wanna answer that question. Property taxes in our English speaking world originated way back in a way that's obvious to us now after the Norman invasion of ten sixty six. William the Red, Rufus, the conqueror they called him, the son of a bastard, no, the bastard son of a king, and he was. But that doesn't mean he's not God's man. God didn't use him. He did, but he did a lot of evil things, very much evil things. He immediately organized the whole country of England. He conquered it. So it was, he said, it's all mine. Battle of Hastings, fourteen October ten sixty six. And he divided the country up in about 200 parts to 200 and gave that land, each of those parts to, to about 200 of his chief officers that came over with him.
And he said to each of them, I don't care how you do it. I'll make suggestions to you, but according to how much land you got, you've got to provide x number of knights, k n I g h t s. That's a fighting man mounted on horseback, fully trained and equipped for forty days each year, depending upon how much land you have. So then he went about not long after that. And he did the doomsday book, which was a survey of all private property in England. I mean, right down to the last chicken and hog. And by the way, the doomsday book are called the doms, the dom book. Yeah. That's an ancient concept. And the word doom back then is Anglo Saxon word.
And even Alfred in the August had a Dom book or doom. We say doom today, but then it was one O Dom. And what it meant was judgment day. It didn't, and that doesn't, and that doesn't mean negative judgment. It could be be, it doesn't mean a curse. It could be a blessing of judgment. Depends upon whether the verdict is in your favor. It's just a general catchall word to them for judgment. What the courts do, the courts are places of doom, judgment, and they call it the doomsday book. And, every chicken and every, fence post is, is listed in there in the whole blasted kingdom. Why? So he'd know how much each man owed him in tax and dependent upon the worth of that property And those and that was for national defense.
That was a tax. There was no money to speak of. It was a moneyless country in those days, and wealth was in the fee, f e e. And that's the Anglo Saxon word for cattle.
[01:41:37] Unknown:
And this is let me interrupt. This is where that word estate comes in. This guy has an estate because it's not his land. The king gave it to him, and he owes duty.
[01:41:48] Unknown:
That's a good point, Roger. And that word estate, if you have an airport, is a French word. And William and his invaders were norm from Norway. But they had settled, been settled on the coast of France for about a hundred and sixty years, and they'd picked up a bastardized form of the French tongue. And when they invaded, they brought that French tongue with them. And from that time, October until the mid thirteen hundreds, the only tongue spoke in the courts and in the parliament. They could see par parliament's a French word, parley, a place where you have parley. Before the invasion, it was called the witengamot.
The witengamot, the meeting of the gray bearded men. Well, now it's parliament. Everything was in French. If you were an Anglo Saxon, there were only about 6,000 Normans in the country and about, 800,000 Anglo Saxons. Normans ran the place. If you didn't speak their tongue, you couldn't even get into a court. See? So they were kind of shut out and they didn't have a policy of extermination. You think extermination is bad in Israel right now. It's bad. They didn't hold a candle about the Normans tried to do to the Anglo Saxons and the Celts. It was extermination time and they went after him. Well, it stands, stands a reason. And, and also they got what was coming to them. That's what I say. That's the way God works. The Anglo Saxons did the same thing to the Celts when they got there. They tried to exterminate them. But the Celts got what they deserved because when they got there, they tried to exterminate the Iberians.
It just goes round and round and round, the evil empires. Men are wicked, dirty, rotten, low down, scummy devils about things like that. And every race of man thinks he is the only one that's greater than all the rest. The Japs thought it. No. They believed it. It's part of their religion. The Germans were whipped up to it. It's part of their religion too. And maybe let's say it's true. Don't ever say it and don't act like it. God won't allow it. Even if you think your race is right or true or greater or have better genetics, there's no sense saying it, friends, because God won't stand for that. It'll it'll work into arrogance and it will draw people that are dangerous. And there may, as I can say, if you wanna believe it, I, and maybe act on it yourself, but just be careful.
The history of mankind is replete with what happened to people that do that. I can't change that. Just an observation from history, but that that's how the tax has started. It was every man owed and to, and to, if the King defended, we took that money or not that money that night and defended his kingdom, he would defend in your little parcel of land. And if you defend your little parcel parcel of land, you're defending help defend the kingdom. And then that those 200 officers, each divided their land into parts and they told the people they parceled it out to, you can make all the money you want, farm, raise cattle, whatever. You just owe me this much contribution in the, under the night's fee. And it got down to small parcels of land, about five acres, where a man, all he owed every year was production of a brass helmet or production of a sword.
Or one fella I read about if if they ever went if the army of ever went to the continent of, Europe to France to defend, William's holdings there, the, his only job was to, hold, not make, not provide, but to hold, one of the Knight's helmets as he rode along for battle, then help him get it on. And that was his contribution to national defense. That's how land taxes became to their own here. And so every man in England who owned a parcel of land, whether it be five acres on up, the baleen, the baleen, who was, well, that was the lowest, freehold for the baleen. He, he held five acres.
And so there was always an upward look to provide national defense. Well, by the sixteen hundreds, money had come into England, the gold and silver through Elizabeth, really, and few others, but, sir Francis, Drake, who was that other one that she was sweet on? She was always, she was always playing the men to get them to do all she wanted. Walter Raleigh? Yes, sir Walter Raleigh. They were plunderers of the Spanish shipments of gold and silver from South America. And they'd bring that stuff in England. And then the, the crown of Spain would say, Elizabeth, you've got to stop these men. And she'd say, Hey, I'm just a woman. I can't, I can't do nothing with these guys. They're private plunderers. I, they're not, they're not part of the government of England. She's always playing the woman card. I'm just a woman, you know, that kind of thing. And she was sweet on Drake and a fascinating story ended up chopping one of their heads off. Maybe both of them. I don't remember, but there was money in England. So the, at that point when gold and silver became, pretty plentiful in England, then the law changed and you can provide money instead of a night. It was called the night's fee, F E E, the night's fee, pay payment. Well, you can provide money and not have to provide a night. And then taxes of money were born out of land at that point. We get to America. Okay, here we are in America.
We got to pay, we got to pay, or the people paid, and it was sold to the American people. This was much, much later, not with the Puritans. That was all national defense with them too. But then later, the whole land tax thing was sold in each state that we're going to give free education to everybody. That's how it was sold. Knowing knowing, of course, that would put government in control of education. And that would be an education to support your government, whatever their policies were. And that's what happened. And it but it's easy to justify it when a in a country wherever Burton or everybody owns a little land. And there was a time when that was true. Was that about in the middle of the 1800s later? Yeah. Yeah. But let me this slow catching on. By the time my grandpa became a school teacher in the little country schools around here, I was reaching he left me his desk. It was a big wooden desk, and my granddad was a farmer. He farmed in the summertime, taught school in the winter.
And and, and was in the bull business too, by the way. He hauled bulls or or leased bulls to people back before artificial insemination, him and my dad. Well, I found a paper he had written when he was in school. It was handwritten. There were no typewriters. It was in the early twenties. Oh, there were typewriters, but he couldn't afford one, so handwritten. It was written online paper. I found it in the back of the top drawer. I didn't know it was there. The question he was trying to answer is, will the government Here's the question. Will the government be able to support public education?
Will the government be able will will the government be able to should the government be given the task of successfully educating American children? So in the 1920s, that was a question that people were asking and they weren't sure it was true. By the time you get to the thirties and forties, they were fully convinced it was true, and the government had moved in and were brainwashing the children. They didn't people didn't know it yet. When I went to school in the late fifties, early sixties, and parents believed that the government was good at educating children. Yep. And America was good and the communists were bad and it was in full force, but immediately, once it became fully accepted, it started to get real ugly and go downhill. And they started teaching or even when I was in school, they tried were just starting to try to have a small segment in PE class in high school on sex education.
That's how that started. And then and then it didn't take but about another ten, twenty years, and the homeschool well, ten years. The homeschooling movement was going like gangbusters. In thirty years, it was going full force. It's growing now even bigger. People want their children out of public education. There's no justification for land taxes because of that. It's time they were stopped. DeSantis is right. But us beating around with a bunch of bunch of, administrative rules isn't gonna change anything. That's my answer. DeSantis has the right idea, but, and I'm glad that everybody's fighting it on the individual level because that's an indication of a rising tide of, hey, wait a minute. Why are we doing this to teach our children to be communist? And that is what they're teaching your children, to be transvestites, to accept homosexuality, to be homosexuals, and to be communist.
No question. And to pee in litter boxes now. That's what's that? And to pee in litter boxes. Yeah. And but hey, listen. I had a buddy that he was he was, he retired and he said, I'll go substitute teach. He went to the local high school and substitute teach, and it was in a bigger town, not where I'm from. And they he had a he was supposed to be babysitting these children that were hard to get along with. And he had this one girl in the class who thought she was a pussycat. And she'd come to school dressed in a pussycat outfit. And she'd be all have all and and that he and the school, he told me this, had to provide a litter bark, a litter box for her to pee in and do anything else she needed to do. And she sat at her desk and she'd curl up in the corner like a pussycat. And he had to recognize that she was. That's the madness, friends. Let's get out of this. Let's cut. There's no reason for land taxes. The excuse was public education, and that's not even true now. They use it for everything else, anything they wanna use it for. I'm sure they probably double set of books with along with that, there's a double set of books. Yeah.
[01:51:38] Unknown:
DeSantis better be careful. He's gonna price Florida out of Florida's reach. Yeah. Maybe With all the other things that are happening with this with this communist in New York, everything moving south, man, the real estate agents are the ones that are cleaning up here. Yeah. The the the rents have gone from 1,500 to 4,500 a month, Brent, over the last five years. Yeah.
[01:52:07] Unknown:
You know, the idea that William had, William the conqueror, is pretty pretty good. I mean, he was he was smart the way he organized his national defense and everybody contributed. And that's the militia. That's what that is. Yeah. That was a nice way, a really nice way, and a fair way to establish the militiamen. And the militia is part of our of our it's not an option. It's part of our common law tradition, part of our constitution, the way it's set up. Go ahead, Roger. A lot of people are calling for, Trump to institute the militias.
[01:52:37] Unknown:
Stewart Rhodes, notably. By the way, Stewart Rhodes is reforming Oath Keepers. And, he's a sharp cut. Stuart Rhodes is. Graduated Yale Law School, but he started working for Ron Paul. Was one of Ron Paul's, main people. And, then, of course, he got locked up in the Jan six. He's out. He's one of the most level headed, calm people that I've seen in a while. He just doesn't get excited about any of that stuff. You know? He, matter of fact, addresses it. But that's he's calling he's called they're calling on Trump to do that right now. Stewart's been, he's felt the force of the government,
[01:53:21] Unknown:
as I have, prison. Throw ye in, throw ye out, throw ye in, throw ye out. And that it makes you a more calculated warrior. Put it that way. Uh-huh. A lot more calculated. And then you see what's important.
[01:53:34] Unknown:
And then that's Those are the ones that are serious too. A little more. They're somber and calculated, goal oriented, and driven.
[01:53:43] Unknown:
Boy, I I agree. And so, God can't use anybody until he beats what's worthless out of them. And he will do it. He will do it, and it will be unpleasant. And then he he chastened every chastens every son he receives, and do not despise it, says in Hebrews.
[01:54:01] Unknown:
Well, I but let me stop. And if there's somebody else who wants to comment, Roger, I I've got it. I'm just gonna say is as the country's built up and cities have built up and civilizations built up as it was, by the people that control the money, you know, and they're able to make money, all these efforts, well, they just incorporated in the municipality or whatever the entity is. Well, we've got a school referendum, and it's in the next election, or we gotta bond that referendum for a new civic center or whatever else. They put that in the election, and the city votes on it. So that's where the tax comes from. Who is, the somebody saying That would be me.
[01:54:42] Unknown:
Okay. I've got I've got one thing. Please. As Brent, I don't know if you know this or not, but we, the Radio Ranch Trust Group met for the first time on Wednesday. And, we went through the, through the first lesson. And one of the things that sheriff Darr said, and and I realized that you can't speak for him, and I realized that that trust course was put in the can a few years ago. But people noticed when Sheriff Darr was talking about sovereign citizen and how he runs into those. And their question is, is, what if, any change has been made in his, in his take on, the national as opposed to sovereign citizen?
Does has he is he aware that there are two political statuses, the law of the city, the law of the land, law of nature, nature's god? I don't think he runs into that, like, on a day to day basis, but I do know that we have people in Barre County, Michigan that have actually sent him notice I understand. Yeah. Of their national status. And I realize you can't speak for him. Maybe we can get him on the show sometime to talk about it. I don't know. I think there was a question in there somewhere.
[01:56:11] Unknown:
Was there somebody else that was I thought there was Paul and somebody else who was trying to ask him. I stepped right on you. So I'm sorry. You come was who are you? You were not. It was Paul. Oh, hell. Yeah. Hey, Rogers. Alright. Well, there's Wayne. Hey, Wayne. How are you doing, my friend?
[01:56:31] Unknown:
Pretty pretty good. I know time's sharp. I just had a real quick question for Brent. If he needs to answer Paul's question first.
[01:56:40] Unknown:
Oh, well, I'll just quickly say we ought to bring sheriff Darragh on. And, sheriff Darragh been sheriff over twenty years, and he he's run into a lot of that. He even in his small county. And by by the way, Michigan's a hotbed for that kind of stuff. Yes. It is. A long time. So, yeah, he understands it. He's like any magistrate in government. He recognizes, I think, from what I understand about him, He recognizes the things you're talking about. He is a avid student of the common law, has been for over twenty years, and that's why he's able to get on with me and give such good examples, and he's boots on the ground. I'll try to get him on. Maybe that's that's a good idea. That'd be a great we'd love to have him on for even an hour. You know? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Somebody else had something. Wayne?
[01:57:32] Unknown:
Yeah. Thanks, Roger. Brent had a quick question, and this has to do with our presidential executive orders. And what's rolling around and what's really questioning, in the minds of a lot of folks is, pre, propositioned some executive orders, and you have federal judges stepping on them, almost all across the country. And here you have a duly elected president, you know, doing these orders, but you have only appointed judge, you know, stopping the whole process. And this morning I was reading, in Illinois, there's a federal judge up there that is petitioning to have, over 600, illegal aliens released, okay, that were picked up by d a by ICE. And these were, in some cases, criminals convicted in a court of law.
Do you do you need to sign off?
[01:58:20] Unknown:
No. Keep going. We'll just see if you can get an answer to where it stretches as far as you can, Wayne.
[01:58:26] Unknown:
Okay. Just that, again, these federal judges are stepping on some of the activities that, you know, ICE is, constitutionally, created, agency. These criminals have been convicted, but then the judge comes in and stops the whole process. And I was kinda wondering what's the legal principle involved here in, allowing the judges to do this.
[01:58:47] Unknown:
The legal principle involved is separation of powers. We in America, we want the branches of government to disagree with one another. And just because a judge says, well, no. Here's what we're gonna do. Well, he he still depends. The judge still depends upon president Trump ordering it done. And he may or he may not. And the US marshals that are involved will have to make a a decision. Am I gonna do I work for the president of The United States or do I work for the court? And the truth is they're assigned to both in many cases, but they've got to make a choice too. That's our common law government. Our common law government is a perpetual, never ending Mexican standoff, a three way Mexican standoff between the three separate but co equal branches of government.
And those in the law of the city, which includes almost every other country in the world, can't figure out how we have a country. How do you have a country where the government doesn't control that kind of thing? Where there isn't a final word? The only final word we have in America is the jury. That's final. Dogmatically, no answers owed from anybody on the jury why they did what they did. That's what we have as finality, and that's all we have down here on land is finality. Of course, the maker of heaven and earth is final in his decisions. He's the god of war and the god of everything else, the god of love.
And the the rest of the world can't understand that either. Islam does not understand a god of war being a god of love. They don't have that. We do Because our our god is the maker of all things, seen and unseen. And he decides what happens, and he'll make it happen. And once he decides, and we have no control over that. But the jury does have the responsibility, delegate it from god, to be that final arbiter. But see, DJ Trump, the president, and the federal courts are are fighting with one another, and they depend on each other as does the congress, the legislative branch.
Again, the stress. It's a three way Mexican standoff, and we did this when we taught one of our courses when sheriff Darr and I. We played the final scene of the movie, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly with that three way Mexican standoff, that gun battle. Remember that? Vaguely. Yeah. Yeah. And that's what that's what our government is. And the idea is James Madison says in the Federalist Federalist Papers is as long as government's fighting with each other, as long as there's conflict in government, as long as the greed and the ambition of men and those three branches of government is at odds with each other, they'll leave us alone. That's the idea of common law government. Yeah.
[02:01:20] Unknown:
Brent, I would think that, you know, what's in the best interest of the of the American public? You know, the public interest that is, you know, spending hundreds of billions of dollars to feed and clothe and, medicate, you know, illegal aliens, and then you also have convicted, criminals being put back on the streets. So I would think the public interest would be the overriding factor
[02:01:40] Unknown:
between the two, branches. The over the overriding factor is three separate and coequal branches of government. We don't wanna give that up for nothing. And the more they're fighting I like it's good that they're doing this. But you're not gonna have people in government that are good, ever. There's no such thing as a good man. And where do you find that in the Bible? The Bible says there is none righteous, no, not one. There is they have all gone out of the way. The poison of asps is under their lips, Paul the Apostle speaking. Their throat is an open sepulcher full of dead men's bones.
That's us. Our righteousness is as filthy rags. I tell people, I don't trust, clients. Can't you come to me? And I'd say, let's start out with this. I don't trust you, and if you're dumb enough to trust me, I have a lot lower opinion of you. Let's start out with let's start out with, I don't trust you, you don't trust me, but let's both trust God that God will use both of us for the benefit of the other. Let's help each other. And let's trust God to impel us to that. But to think that there's gonna be somebody oh, well, I'm I'm glad you do. And I like I said, I'm not preaching at you. You're the guy that raised the question. That gives us an opportunity to air the answer, but not at the guy that asked the question. You know, some people ask hypothetical questions because they're asking for somebody else, or they just wanna be part of the discussion. So, no, I'm not, I'm not throwing that at you. But to make the point, and we don't wanna forget this. This is fundamental to who we are as a people. James Madison understood this. James Madison was a the student of John Witherspoon, the only, he was the only clergyman, that signed.
About 25 Bible school graduates signed the declaration of '76, but he was the only clergyman. He was shipped in from Scotland. He was a hardcore bible believing Calvinist presbyterian. And he and James Madison was his closest student. James Madison understood understood the depravity of the human heart. He knows it's in the Bible. He understands that we are hopeless without Jesus Christ, utterly hopeless. Nothing in my hand I bring, only to thy cross I cling. Other refuge have I none hangs my hopeless soul on thee? That's it. That's that's where God will get a man. And once he gets them there, then he can use him. But you gotta under we not you. We must keep in our forefront of our minds that God doesn't need us.
He just takes us and uses us. He could use anything he wanted. As, Rutherford said, and when he in that book, Lex Rex Lex Rex, back that the Scotsman, Rutherford, he said, God can use any agency of his creation to get done what he wants to get done. He can use the clouds and the skies, the atmosphere, animals, men, whatever. He's gonna get done what he wants to get done. Now that's the reformed position, what people used to call Calvinism. God is absolutely, utterly sovereign. And if God is absolutely, utterly sovereign, he has delegated no sovereignty to anybody else. That's why the sovereign movement is wrong with sovereign man and all no, no, no, no, no, no, no. We worship the maker of heaven and earth, the God in the skies that we cannot see. We do not worship and fall down before any similitude, any place, Mecca.
No, no cathedral, no, no idol, no icon, no, no, no man who was set up on a pedestal like a priest or a pope. No, no, no, no, no. That's denial of God. That ticks God off. Him and him alone is the object of our worship. We fall down and worship him in our hearts, and by doing so, he can use us to great benefit of ourselves and others and by his in his glory and our enjoyment. We get the enjoyment, he gets the glory. Well, thanks for bringing that up, though. But this separate coequal branch of government, if you go to the Bible, you see that God will not tolerate any man ever gathering the three powers of government into a single will.
Saul tried it. Saul, king of Israel, the kingship, as the prophet said, was ripped from him because he did that. And Adolf Hitler did it. He accepted it. He met a nice guy, smart guy, did a lot of good things. That's the one thing God will not accept under any circumstances. Why? Because it is an attempt to usurp the position of the Messiah of God. Jesus Christ himself has authority to gather all three branches of government, the powers of them, into a single set of hands, and that's his, and he will do that. But no other member of Adam's race has that right. And by the way, anybody who tries it is the very definition of that word that the apostle John uses four times in his epistos.
Antichristos? In Latin, it's vicar of Christ. Vicar Christos. That's written right on the pope's garments. What does that mean? Vicar is the preposition in Latin that means the same thing as the preposition in Greek, ante. It means instead of, in place of. I say that on the authority of men like John Knox. You said that back during the reformation. It's true. Anti means in place of. You go to the New Testament, you see it used in in the compounded words. You see it used by itself. It always means instead of or in place of. Mere image of. And if you try to any man tries to take on anybody, submits the taking on of the three branches of government in himself or any government who said they do that, any single will, whether it be a body of a legislature, a single man, a bureaucracy, a single will of a bureaucracy, if they take on those three powers, legislative, executive, and judicial, Jesus Christ will crush them and has, and you can see it in history.
You know, bureaucracies say the president says, okay. I've got now courts. I've got bureaucratic courts, administrative courts. I've got the administrative code. That's my legislation. These are my courts. And then after I take you through the legislation of the courts and my administrative courts, then I will pronounce the judgment. That's antichrist, friends. That's administrative law. That's the law of the city. That's the canon civil laws of Rome. Every country in the world operates that the way at every level except ours, and it's creeping in with us. It's always been creeping in. It's our job to slap it down like a red headed stepchild.
[02:08:17] Unknown:
Hey, Brian.
[02:08:18] Unknown:
Yeah. Somebody wanna say Yeah. It's just a fun comment.
[02:08:21] Unknown:
Yeah. Go ahead. Then the the lady wants to talk. Make it quick, please. Thank you. Yep. Sure will. Sure will. I appreciate your comments, Brent. And, just my final one is that, when when we boil it all down, we have to look at the reality of situation, which is families like Lake and Riley have been, devastated. Molly Tibbets and other women have been murdered by illegals. Plus you have, to thousands of families that have been devastated by fentanyl poisoning, losing kids and all that. So that's why I think the American people just want a final resolution of this so we don't have to go through this with too many more people. So thanks, Brent. Well, thank
[02:08:56] Unknown:
you. Well, Dag Emmett, we do have a final resolution, and we're commanded to not pay an attempt not not to not to be oriented to the outcome. This is the hard thing. The Bible commands us to be oriented to the process. The outcome is bad. The only way to control the outcome is to focus on getting the process right. We will never stop the rape, the murder unless we focus on the process and say, well, this federal judge is subject is dependent upon the president to enforce his orders through the US marshals. The president is dependent upon the federal judge. They're each pushing. They each hate each other. They're fighting, and the legislative branch the same way. Still, I say, no. Our common law tradition is not outcome oriented at all. Once you become outcome oriented, as ugly as it is, you wanna stop it. It. But the only way to stop it is to be process oriented. If you become outcome oriented, soon enough, the ends will justify the means. God doesn't allow us to do that. He doesn't allow it. That's the motto of the Jesuits order. The ends justifies the means. Once you have that in your head, torture becomes lawful, and it is with them. The inquisition, the law of the city, the entire world is inquisitorial.
That means the ends justifies the means. We don't wanna go there. That's why we oh, we know the evil that's occurring out here. How are we gonna stop it? Not by going out there and stopping it because that won't stop it. What will stop it is getting the process right, insisting upon due process, insisting upon common law government of three separate and coequal branches, supporting the independence of mind of those in those three branches, such as Trump. Do what you think is right, g DJ. You took an oath to the constitution. That means you gotta do what you believe the constitution says, not what the federal judge says. Mhmm. Okay. That's I'm good. Glad you brought that up. I'm excited about I'm excited about all that. Go ahead, Robert. His oath has one word in it. The other dose don't have it. That's preserve.
[02:11:00] Unknown:
Joan was wanting to ask a question. Our little Costa Rican listener. Hi, Joan.
[02:11:05] Unknown:
Hi. Hey, Brent. Regarding Wayne's important matter, is our government of is or is not our government of, for, and by the American people? Thank you.
[02:11:27] Unknown:
Well, Deuteronomy chapter 17 says that those you choose as leaders among you must be of you. That's the ablative of source. That means from you. It must be one of you. Our leaders must be one of us. Why? So that our government will be for us. And that is true. And that that is true in our common law tradition as well. That's why the president of The United States must be born, natural born. There are two requirements to be natural born. He must fill both of them. Not only must he have been born on the territorial within the territorial boundaries of one of The United States or possessions, he also both of his parents must have been natural citizens at the moment he was birthed.
DJ Trump fills that requirement. His mother is a foreigner, was a foreigner. She was from the Isle Of Lewis off the coast of Scotland. She immigrated to The United States. But when she gave birth to DJ, she had become a citizen through proper channels. That's lawful. Tom Cruise? Or what was his name Thomas? Senator Cruise. Not Tom. That's the other one. Tel Aviv Tel Aviv Tel Aviv. Yeah. He's not a natural born citizen last time I checked, and neither was Rubio. He ran for president. He wasn't a natural born citizen. We had another one. I can't remember his name, but I'm saying we're not as careful.
Well, Obama. That one's right. Yeah. He wasn't either. Why? Because we want a government. If the government's from us, one of us, if those running that are of us, they will be for us. At least we stand a good chance. But you have somebody from another country, they're gonna have that natural inclination, of course, to be loyal to the land of their birth. God put that in all of us. It's not that we're against them. They can come here. They can be governor. They can be a judge, but they can't be, but they can't be president of The United States. And then for Common law. Yeah. Common law. But then on and on we go. This is no small matter. And the law of God fleshes out our common law tradition in a lot of places, not everywhere.
Some places our common law tradition fleshes out, puts to the rubber puts the rubber to the road of the Bible. That's what it does.
[02:13:51] Unknown:
So, yeah, that we we want that. Go ahead. Somebody wants it. I think we're finished. Anybody else got a question? Brent, do you have to go somewhere?
[02:13:58] Unknown:
No. I do. Your schedule's busy. I have to eat this lamb burger. That right here. Rascal. You rascal.
[02:14:05] Unknown:
Yes. Who is that?
[02:14:08] Unknown:
Larry?
[02:14:09] Unknown:
Oh. Hey. Brent.
[02:14:12] Unknown:
So there are some students that believe, because they're being taught by a certain teacher, that the constitution was not put together by the people. It was put together by a bunch of attorneys, and then they say that the constitution was nothing more than a constitution with the emphasis on con as in con job. And I looked it up in in in the national archives, and not every person that ratified the US constitution was an attorney. There is people from different walks of life, like different trades. And so I was wondering, like, what is your thoughts on on that type of, you know, promotion of the US constitution?
Well, the the framer, the man is called the framer of the constitution,
[02:15:07] Unknown:
and rightly so, with James Madison. Remember I said he was the closest student that that, Witherspoon had. And Witherspoon was the unofficial, the unofficial, but nonetheless true de facto leader of the Scottish enlightenment. And the men such as Madison and Jefferson, they weren't lawyers in that sense. As far as I know, they never practiced law. They knew a lot, but I don't believe they practiced law. If they did, there's not much said about it. Now Patrick Henry practiced law. That's true. Quite a while. He wasn't aristocracy. Those other fellows were kind of a natural aristocracy with natural money.
Patrick Henry wasn't. By the way, Patrick Henry was suspicious of the constitutional convention, but he later, affirmed the constitution of The United States. He didn't know anything about it because he wasn't there, and then he was suspicious of it. But remember our constitution of The United States, we give too much too much credit to the men at the convention because our constitution was ratified by was duly ratified by the militiamen of The United States called the people. The people, we, the people of The United States. And they're the ones that gave instructions to their, their representatives to the, to the convention and their, their, representatives are pretty, pretty faithful when you read about it, about doing the will of the people in their particular state.
Some of the state just kept holding off. New York, for example, that fellow wouldn't commit himself to anything till the very end. He wouldn't even vote. He'd say I respectfully respectfully abstain. You know, he wouldn't he didn't want anybody to know what he was thinking because that's what they told him to do. And but it's the people of The United States. Now if you're gonna attack the the the ones in the convention for being lawyers, that's kinda silly, I think. Lawyers are someone very easy to demonize. But and because they're the they're the ones that people think are abusing, and often they are, but preacher abuse the truth even more. And most people I know that aren't preachers and lawyers abuse it even more than that. That's just blaming the other guy. And, when you got an upfront man, you blame him. That's just part of the territory, But don't get the idea that we're looking, as I said before, and don't get the idea we're looking for good men to run the government or to have, had a hand in drafting the constitution.
Any more than we would look at the people in the Bible that that pinned the bible to be, upstanding men. They weren't. Oh, they were men that were convicted, but you got some really ugly people in this game. I mean, have you ever read the story about Abraham? Have you read of the life of David? These are murderous, bloody, weak, emotionally weak people. But God, the Bible says, delights in confusing the useful idiots of the evil empire with those that are weak and even unlikely. See, to not recognize that is to not recognize the the righteousness of our God and the deplorable condition of his people.
The Bible even says that the agents of God, we call them angels, look with wonder upon God's people and say, how in the world does our God, our maker, this is the angels talking, get these people to want to try to obey him. That's what God's people want to do. They don't do a very good job, but God uses his people. But to not recognize that God will get his way, God's the only one, speaking of the constitutional convention, God's the only one that can make a straight lick with a crooked stick. He took the nation of Israel, crooked a stick as you can find, and made a straight lick I used them to deliver up and and murder the sacrifice for the sins of the rest of the nations. That's us.
And like, that the prime minister of Britain said, he was Jewish. What was his name back in the eighteenth? Disraeli. Oh, Disraeli. He said he said, oh, I don't understand why people hate Jews. He said Jews are just like everybody else, only more so. Just like everybody else, only more so. Well, the reason we're laughing is because that's true. You can't when it comes to sinfulness, there are no putting it in categories in the eternal sense. Now, one, Paul the apostle says, if you've broken the law of God, if you've reached it at one point, you're guilty of have having broken all of it and you are worthy of death.
What did what did, God say to our grandpa Adam in the garden? In the day you disobey this one is one point. Dying, you're dead. And that's why we're in this deplorable condition. God is so perfect, so holy, so sinless, so well, you you run out of words to describe it, but he is so much that way that he will not tolerate any imperfection in his presence, the bible says. And the only way that we can come to him boldly as we do. We boldly approach the eternal throne, said Wesley. But we do. The bible teaches that because he sees us through the cleansing of his son Jesus Christ, who even though we aren't perfect, we are in him as it says, and he sees us in him.
We ourselves are positionally perfect. You know, Christianity has always made the distinction, and I pass it along to you, it's biblical, absolutely biblical. There's a distinction with a Christian man between his position and his practice. His position is perfect before his maker. His practice is not. But his maker is cleaning him up day by day, putting open putting a whooping on him where he needs to, taking away the things that don't matter. You've talked about Stewart Rhodes. Stewart, I I interviewed Stewart one time. He was nasty when I interviewed him. And I know why. I mean, he was, he was just terrible. He just, I couldn't get him to relax. Why? Because at that point he was afraid of everything and everybody and afraid of what I would do to him. And he didn't know what was going on and the lay of the land. He was deep in the ditch wrestling around with the devil himself, and they finally got him and threw him in jail.
Now he's out. Now he's calculated. I would say well, I say this as somebody that's been thrown in jail a few times. It has an effect on you. It's a good effect. It's a good effect. You know, Paul the apostle, when he went He traveled all over the Roman empire carrying the gospel. And when he'd get there, he'd go to the synagogue first because he knew those people. He understood them. Well, they finally got so nasty with him, tried to kill him a few times, beat him up, had him just scourged with whips, all sorts of things. Finally said, I can't take this anymore. Blood's on your head, boys. I'm done with you. I'm going to the other nations.
And he did. He went to the other nations. But everywhere he went, the Jews dogged him. Terrible. Read the book of acts. The new testament is all about the prototype of false religion and what it does and the warnings we have against it. And by the way, to drop a footnote well, I'm gonna drop a footnote after I finish. When Paul the apostle went into a town as he traveled, he never asked, never asked what the hotels were like. He always asked what the jails were like, That's where he knew he'd end up, and he did. But he got a lot done. Well, the, the, the admonition in the New Testament against those of false religion is just leave them alone.
Don't bid them Godspeed is the That's a lot in that Greek word, beautiful word, Godspeed. Don't have them into your house. Don't be friends with them. Don't buddy up with them. Don't attack them. This is the command of the new Testament under the old Testament. Do not attack them. Specifically, Jews don't attack them. Just treat them as what? Tax collectors. That's easy. How do you treat a tax collector? Well, you certainly don't call him and tell him off. You don't go looking to antagonize him, twist his nose. No, you just leave him alone. Hope he leaves you alone. And if you see him on the street and it's uncomfortable not to say hi, you say hi. As the Bible says, honor all men, honor all men. That includes the Jew, but it doesn't say go out of your way to be his friend. Just leave him alone. You see the whole world right now is up in arms against him and they're fighting and debating. And that's not, that's not where God wants us. And if we get there and we get on the attack mode, like the, like the German people did, we'll destroy our nation. You're not If you do that, you're not following the command. As a Christian man, you're not following the command of Jesus Christ.
He said just back off, leave them be. They're okay. Don't antagonize them. If you do what he says, he will take care of the problems that we have, whatever they are. It's not up to me to say, I just know what I'm supposed to do. I'm in his army. He's my, he's my commander. I do what he says. He says, just leave him alone. My father said to me, I have trouble with somebody. I go to him, dad, I don't know what to do. What are you talking about? Well, so and so doing this and doing that. I remember my dad just said this all his life. It's biblical. He say, get away from it.
Get away from it. Yeah. Yeah. Now maybe somebody said that to some of you, maybe your parents have said that they don't be trying to get, you know, having another conversation isn't gonna change anything. See? No. Go ahead. All it's gonna do is accelerate it and probably amplify it. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Do what Jesus said. And dad was telling me that. Yeah. Okay. Yep. Walk away. Everybody's better off. Mhmm. Brent? Hey, Brent. Yeah. I'm here. I'm here.
[02:25:48] Unknown:
Go ahead. Hey. This is Larry.
[02:25:50] Unknown:
Yeah. Just two things real quick. I really enjoyed your trust class, the other night. I've I've already listened to the first, presentation four times. It's just I learned something new every time I listen to it. It's just a lot to grasp. And, so I really appreciate you putting those together. And, I was just two things, getting back to what you said before, there is none righteous, no, not one. I believe in that verse, it says there's none that do with good. And I was listening to a preacher one time and he was saying that, you know, the King James translators, they, they had an agenda in, you know, in some areas when they were doing their translation.
And, he did some research, and and he, when he started researching Psalm thirty seven twenty three, and that's the verse that says the steps of a good man are ordered by the Lord. He's he found out that that word good is not even in the original Hebrew and he concluded that the King James translators had an agenda. They were being, you know, I guess, you know, promoted or pushed along by the king. And I was wondering, I know you've you've looked at every most every word in the Bible in in your, translation that you put together. Do you find that to be true that that word good is not there in the original Hebrew in that particular verse?
And, the only other other thing I have for you is there's a lot of talk between, like, using the words attorney and lawyer and a lot of people think they're synonymous. Do you prefer to be called a lawyer or an attorney and what's the difference? Those two things.
[02:27:54] Unknown:
Brent, did you take off?
[02:27:58] Unknown:
There you go, Larry. You broke Brent.
[02:28:01] Unknown:
Wow. No. I'm eating I'm eating Okay. Alright. There he is. There he is. I'm eating corn chips. I'm eating corn chips. So when Larry was talking, I killed the mic, and then I forget to turn it back on. But this corn chips, you know, they can make a lot of noise as you know by Oh, yeah. You can hear them. Anyway, attorney, the word attorney is a Norman French word that, Normans brought to England in the year October.
[02:28:30] Unknown:
And
[02:28:32] Unknown:
it means it means agent. What's an agency? Well it's a man that's delegated one man delegates to an agent authority to do certain things or a lot of things. It is a fiduciary contract. There are fiduciary contracts and non fiduciary contracts. An agency, as is a trust, is a fiduciary relationship. So it's a good word. There's nothing wrong with it. I'd rather be called a lawyer, but there are times when I call myself an attorney in certain context in the court so that the courts will understand what I my position is or what the other guy's position is. Because lawyers are not even taught what a fiduciary duty is these days.
Aren't even taught. They don't even know a lot of them. It's not but if if you're gonna be a lawyer or you're a fiduciary, you ought to know what fiduciary obligation is, and there is no class on fiduciary obligation. Oh, there may be class on trust and estates, but not specifically on what we call a fiduciary relationship, and there ought to be. I agree. Okay. Now you make an excellent point. Some, oh, by the way, a lawyer is is what that has the same, like understanding of a sawyer. And when my granddad and my dad ran a sawmill, they always make a few bucks on the side sawing trees up for people so they don't they got trees. They don't have to go buy lumber. Well, the man that ran the sawmill, we called sawyer.
He ran the blade. But what does a sawyer do? Why do they call him a sawyer? Because he would set the sawyer, and I used to watch men do this, set and set the teeth on the blade They had a little tool they did well, you bend it a certain way, and then you sharpen each blade by itself, a little tool you set on the blade and crank it. Sharpen the blade, or the the tooth I mean. And the sawyer is the man that makes the saw cut to the advantage that he wants. Makes the saw cut to the application he wants. Sawyer, that's what a lawyer is supposed to do. He's supposed to take the law and show how it cuts to the application that he believes it ought to cut to given a specific set of circumstances.
I like that word. I like the example. Yeah. Hell, well, thank you, Roger. The the other word for Sawyer doesn't fit. That's a that's a limb that bobs up and down in a flowing river in the Mississippi Valley. That's the fourth word. That's called the sawyer because it goes up and down like a sawmill. But that's not what I mean. But attorney is a good word too. Now coming to the Psalm thirty seven twenty three, I wanna know, do you remember the Bible teacher's name who told you that there was no word for good in Psalm thirty seven twenty three?
[02:31:27] Unknown:
Yeah. He's, out of Connecticut. Rodney starts with a b, bureau or
[02:31:36] Unknown:
I have to I have to look here. Here's what I here's what I wanna say about him. Whoever he is, he's telling the truth and he's given attention to detail. He's right. There is no word for good in that verse. The only word there the word for man is not just any man. It's the word gabor. Now in other words, the archangel Gabriel, gabor, Gabriel, gabor el. That means, El. It means law giver. Mighty man of the law giver. Agent in that case, angel, gay Gabriel. But what it says is that, a geboar, a mighty warrior, his ways are ordered by the Lord. Remember a while ago I said, just biblical, you see it everywhere. You see it here in a small way. Maybe not an overt way, but our God is the God of war.
Our God of love is the God of all war. The Bible says that the rider, the rider prepares the horse.
[02:32:38] Unknown:
Mobile. Somebody somebody's chomping in on us. If your mute just change everybody. Check your mute, please. The rider
[02:32:46] Unknown:
the rider prepares the rider prepares the horse for battle, but victory is from the Lord. I don't care what you do. The God of war, the only God of war, will dictate the outcome of every conflict. And you may not understand why or how he did what he did or why you lost or the other looks like the bad guy won, but just keep in mind when the the, captain of the Lord's army is when Joshua met him before the battle of Jericho. He saw him out at the edge of camp. He was walking by himself, and he said essentially, halt who goes there, like military men do. He said, who are you?
Are you forced or against us? And the mighty warrior said neither. I am the captain of the armies of Yahuah. Now here's the significant point I'm gonna make. Are you for us or against us? He said neither. And that's the way God is. Our God is above everything. You don't we don't need to be worrying about him getting on our side or getting him on our side. We need to be worried about us making sure we're on his side. That's our task. And that shouts. And in this verse, Psalm, what did you say, 37, I think it was? Yeah. Thirty seven twenty three. Yeah. There is no word good. It just says the the steps of a mighty warrior.
Not just any man, a mighty warrior are ordered by Yahuah. Let me look here at the Numeric and Standard to see if it does it. They translate Numeric and Standard translates blameless person. No. That's not right either. There's a word for blameless in Hebrew and it's not in this verse. Ain't it amazing though? And I and numerical standard is about as good a bible translation as you can find that's well known on the open market. Matter of fact, it is. I would argue it is. But I don't like the way they did this here. By the way, I I knew, he's gone now, the editor, the editing translator of the New American Standard Bible.
I'm surprised he says this here, or he let it go. But you know when you translate the Bible, there's so much to it. And I don't care how many times, and I've gone over it a lot, you just There's so many things to catch because these tongues are not spoken tongues anymore, so they're obscure. They're in writing. We can study them. We can know them. But there's a difference between that and having it as your native tongue. And none of the words of the Bible are native. Oh, by the way, Paul, you'd mentioned the Lord's prayer and the Aramaic and all, and Jesus spoke Aramaic.
There's really no proof of that. Maybe he did, probably did. I mean, from what I understand about the first century and Palestine, yeah. But God chose not to record the Bible in Aramaic. He chose to record it in Koine Greek, the street Greek of the Roman empire, the merchants Greek, the sailors Greek, the pigeon Greek of the Roman empire. And that's what we've got to go on, that's what he has given us. And to try to go to another tongue would be to add to the Bible. Aramaic, they spoke it around. We have ancient documents in Aramaic, but that's not the focus of my study. Although I do know Aramaic words, some of them. There are some in the Bible. Aramaic in the book of Daniel and the other, and a couple other books, A scattered word throughout so you learn a little bit about Aramaic or pericopes of it in the bible.
And I'll focus on it there where it's in the old testament. But God in his sovereignty has chosen to deliver his newer testament in Koine Greek. And that's that's the final word. That's the final word. Brent, go ahead.
[02:36:53] Unknown:
Yeah. Just a follow-up. So do you have you ever come up since you're you were already aware of what I just asked about, have you do you have any theories as to why the King James translators, and I don't know how many were involved in this, why they add it to the word of God in that particular verse. Have you ever thought about what have have you ever come up with any theories as to why?
[02:37:16] Unknown:
Oh, I know. Well, I know overall. You and you can go to the Internet. We don't have to go look this stuff up. Go to the Internet and look up what the King James orders to his translators. It's all there. And, the overall purpose of the King James Bible and the translation was to overcome the overwhelming popularity of the Geneva Bible. That's the purpose of it. That's the only reason that it came to fruition. Half the translators were Puritans. That means they were Biblical Anglicans. A Puritan was a Biblical Anglican.
An Anglican had the doctrines that were reformed. Read the 39 articles of the Anglican church. They're beautiful. I I adhere to most f substantive everything everything there. And their clergy swears to it. They don't believe any of it. No practice. It's odd. But the Puritans the Puritans were biblical Anglicans, and, they were on about half of them or so. I don't know. I'd be able to back and count, but they believe the Bible. A lot of them didn't believe the Bible was true. Didn't care. They but all of them, every translator on that translation team had to swear an oath that he supported the law of the city, the civil law, the canon civil law of Rome's doctrine of government called the divine right of kings.
That that in other words, king James was a government of a single will. And they didn't support that. And there were some men in England exceedingly bitter until they died because they were the ones they thought that really had the wherewithal and qualified to be on that translation team and wanted to be, but King James wouldn't let them on. As as qualified or more qualified of many of the men that were there. The other reason that there's trans or, false yeah. It's false. Added words, takeaway words. Why? Because one of King James' orders was that when it came to a choice, when it came to the translator's choice between elegance and accuracy, he ordered them to choose elegance.
That was the policy of the King James Bible. Because he did that and these men were capable men, the King James Bible, I think, is clear. As beautiful as shake Shakespeare is, it's not as beautiful as the King James Bible. The rhythm and the cadence of that book are overwhelming. But the trouble is in some of those, the word of God comes across, but it's not as accurate. If you choose accuracy for translation, your your translation is going to be clumsy in some places. You know, Bible translation was that when when Wycliffe did his translation in the thirteen hundreds, all he had was the Latin Vulgate. He didn't have the original tongues. And if you read his translation into that ancient English, it reads like Latin and people think it's nothing but Latin. All he did was, he didn't, nobody had ever tried this kind of stuff before. He just took, okay, here's a Latin word, and here's the English word, just word by word. And it's so clumsy. It's hard to read in English. And it was ancient English, but then add the order of the words, it was clumsy.
Well, it wasn't until later that men begin to try to rearrange the words a little bit so it'd be smooth English, which is which is okay to do. I do that. I rearrange them. I try to make sure I put every word in because like in the Bible, it doesn't say, Jesus Christ's mother. It says the mother of him, Mary, the mother of him. Well we don't say that in English. We say, Jesus mother Mary. So there's a rearrangement of words. And in the Greek tongue, the arrangement of the words didn't matter. They'd arrange words any way they wanted and still understood what they said because the endings of the words are what tell you whether it's the direct object or the indirect object or the noun or the verb or the adjective, and they had and do have. It's a highly inflected language. The most the highest the highest put this in good English. There's no language among men that has been as highly inflected as Greek.
It's it's for communicating detail like no other tongue ever was. That's why I say I can go through it. There there are fifteen, twenty things with every word you can notice. You know, there's I counted one time at least 14 ways to translate a verb or or to 14 forms you can put a verb into to translate it. Well you gotta pay attention to all those as you're translating or you might miss something. It's not a small task, Hebrew is not that complex but at the same time Hebrew does allow for rearrangement of words and that's a new innovation. Even in the late eighteen hundreds the translators would not rearrange the words to make it smooth English and it has it does the same things that Greek does in a lot of ways.
In Hebrew it's not it's not amboses. It would say the mother of Moses' mother would be the mother of him. The mother of him, whereas we would say his mother. You save yourself a couple of words and it makes it smoother English. Now the King James translators didn't do that. And I don't know that that was best. Now we do want to make it word for word as much as possible and and put it across raw and uncooked. And if you do that, and don't worry about elegance, it's going to be wooden and clumsy at some points. But if you're studying the Bible, I don't care. And this translation I did is for me. So whether or not it's clumsy, I know what I'm doing. And I think other people can read it too and understand it if they're serious. Just read it and say, okay, what's he saying here? But it's more precise.
You know the King James translators, I've found places in the King James Bible where they would the same Hebrew root word was translated with over 25. In one instance, almost 50, almost 50, English words and vice versa and vice versa. Well, that I don't blame them for that in the sense. They didn't have computers. They couldn't trace words rapidly enough. Now when I first helped these fellows that were translating the numerical standard, they were he had they had I was part of an army. I was part of an army of students that were looking stuff up and trying to catalog things. Well, today, I can sit in front of a laptop and have that all at my fingertips Mhmm. Amazingly. That's amazing.
And if I don't do something with that, I'm not fulfilling my responsibilities as a teacher. That's why I do it. And I'm I need to do it more. I'm disappointed. I get tired at the end of the day, and I wanna go do something else. But I'm I'm driven at this point in my life to do as much as possible with the laws of nature and the laws of nature's God. I got to talking about myself. But thank you for bringing that up because I'm gonna check the winterized version, make sure I caught that. But, yeah, you're right. And the fellow that was teaching was right.
[02:44:22] Unknown:
Brent, seems like, there was a the the translators wrote a letter, I think, that was in the first version. I'm not sure about subsequent ones that said there were o there there were over 50 or 500 mistranslations, and it wasn't their fault.
[02:44:42] Unknown:
They they say in the prep they say in the preface of the King James, the translators say there's a lot of things we don't know, a lot of things about the Hebrew tongue that hasn't come to light, and there are variations. We give alternate readings in the text. And as time goes on, there'll be other revisions of this. And every Bible translation after the King James in English was a revision of the King James until the publication of the New American Standard Bible, the first publication, that's the one that I was involved with, until 1971.
Everything was a reworking of the King James. Why did they say that? They said that because they were being honest. That's why I don't want to be hard on the King James translators. And they were saying, look, we're gonna, we're gonna keep working on this. And they only had, half a dozen, maybe seven, manuscripts of the new new of the New Testament when they did that translation. Now we have have been discovered almost 6,000, about 6,800 Wow. Manuscripts. They didn't have much. They did a great job. Go ahead.
[02:45:48] Unknown:
Yeah. Yeah. Where do I find evidence of this oath that they had to take?
[02:45:54] Unknown:
I'll tell you where I saw it, and you but yeah. Look it up. I'll tell you where I saw it. It was in a book called How Wide is the Waters? How Wide is the Waters by a fella named Bro I think it was Brobick or Borbick. But How Wide is the Waters? I think it's the name of the book, and it's all about the King James translators. That's what the book's about. It was given to me. The subject, and I find no evidence of that. I'm sorry. I'm curious. Look and see what you can find. If you don't find it there, let's talk again, and I'll say, well, maybe I don't I I remember reading it. Now, I'll look the book up too, and I don't have it. It's around here somewhere, but I don't know where it is. But that's what but obviously, we do know this for sure for now until you are satisfied with the evidence that King James the first was devoted to to him being the government and the law Yep. Being in his breast.
He said that, and that that's why he was such a brutal man, and he was a brutal man. Now you didn't agree with him. He would just chop your head off. I remember reading about now this was in a book by a lawyer. I forget something. The word lion was in the book, but it was about Edward Coke. And during those days when the King James, the Puritans, and others were go requesting meetings with King James about translating the Bible, producing a translation, Edward Coke, he heard in the meeting, he heard King James say, the king protecteth the common law.
And before Koch could catch himself, he ejaculated, I mean, verbally. He said, naysayer, the common law protecteth the king. All of a sudden, the room got real silent. All of a sudden, he realized he had said something he probably wished he hadn't said, and he fell on his face and implored the king to overlook his improvidence. He didn't talk that way to King James, and that was a nice thing to say really. Nay sire, the common law protected the king. He didn't believe that. He believed the king protected the common law. See, Koch held, and rightly so, that the law was above the king. See?
So the law protected the king, not the other way around. Those kind of subtleties were at the forefront of men's minds during the 1516, and seventeen hundreds when our when our country started. They understood those things. They understood the difference between the law of the land and the law of the city.
[02:48:53] Unknown:
Amazing history. Yeah. Well Rent, I gotta go. My stomach is, not agreeable with sick and rent.
[02:49:01] Unknown:
Yeah. This is Bruce from California. Bruce? We had a little Chris. Yeah. We Oh, Chris. We had a little Chris. Yeah. We had a little incident this week that, caused a bit of a distraction. We got up the other morning, and, my daughter was all upset because she was on her way to college. She has to drive there every day. So quite a ways away, actually. And, three of the windows were busted out of her car. Oh. There was glass all over the place. So we had to figure out what to do. She ended up making, an arrangement with the professor to, send her all the materials she needed to study, you know, which is again, we have this blessing of the Internet and computers.
So she took care of that. Then the rest of the day, we scurried around, made some connections, and, got those windows all replaced. We replaced and actually did it ourselves. And, except for the real window, we had a friend of ours put that in who has a glass shop. And, so we got it all straightened out. But in but in the in the, confusion, we overlooked, about the trust class. And, were we supposed to get a a notification by email or something about the start of the trust class?
[02:50:20] Unknown:
Well, Paul is in charge of that group. I'm gonna defer to him if he's still here. If not, you need to get in touch with him. Yeah. That's a Paul question. Yeah. Get in touch with Paul. If you can't reach Paul, go to commonlawyer.com. Say I can't reach Paul, and we'll try to try to raise him.
[02:50:40] Unknown:
Some scratching around there. Thank you, Chris. Sorry about your incident. Okay. I'll see y'all tomorrow. I gotta go, sell up some dentals. Bye, Roger. Bye, Brent. Always a pleasure, buddy. Thank you. You too. Yep. See you soon.
[02:50:58] Unknown:
Bye. We're out of here.
[02:51:23] Unknown:
Hey, Chris in California. Dang. Did did you have any cameras on your daughter's car to see who did it?
[02:51:37] Unknown:
Dang.
[02:52:04] Unknown:
Detroit. Easy to maneuver.
[02:52:14] Unknown:
I know where many of you are still there. I highly recommend you, you know, copy the link for that, debunking
[02:52:23] Unknown:
gender theory. I don't I don't. I don't.
[02:52:27] Unknown:
It's only three minutes. And It's great.
[02:52:35] Unknown:
Not only I just put it up property tax.
[02:52:40] Unknown:
Just like it's just one person.
[02:52:48] Unknown:
Yeah. I just watched that. Unfortunately, she did not need to swallow that, microphone back to back to her molars. Is uncomfortably distorted. But, I mean, what she says is cold. Anyways, anyone else got anything to talk about? We've got about, seven minutes Yeah. And we'll be at the top of the hour.
[02:53:27] Unknown:
I was wondering because I don't have a copy of the New American Standard Bible, but, you know, it's the exception to the rule, but I think it still has the end of the Lord's prayer in square brackets. And of course, that's if somebody's got one, look it up. Matthew six thirteen. And it has a footnote that says this is not found in the older texts. Now all the other most of the other versions just drop it completely.
[02:54:00] Unknown:
Mhmm.
[02:54:03] Unknown:
Interesting. Yeah. I I don't know. I am I was kind of on the fence on that video, which is why I sent it to Brent and asked him to weigh in on it, just because it did smack a little bit of, new age theory. It it was like a cross between theology and new age theory. Now if they would've left the new age crap out of it, I'm thinking that it probably would've been better received. But still, you know, nearly a half million views in fourteen days, that's ridiculous.
[02:54:45] Unknown:
You know, like the Bible says, a little leaven leavens the whole loaf, so you gotta be careful. You know?
[02:54:52] Unknown:
Right.
[02:54:53] Unknown:
Yeah. And guys, I I don't call if you you got the thing I sent out yesterday on almond raw.
[02:55:01] Unknown:
I probably do. Any? Jesse, you keep unmuting. Is that on purpose or not? Jesse? Okay. Well, I hope he forgives me. I've muted him twice, so I'll remove him once and he comes back.
[02:55:26] Unknown:
It's twenty minutes long and he does a good good job of refuting the amen and amen raw. And then if you just look up what if you look up the time and the date of the 1611 and what words meant then to these translators, I mean, you're gonna get a better idea of what they were doing. And that if there is absolutely no place I can find that they took an oath, I've got a book on them called The Learned Men by Gustave West Swift Paine about who these guys were. And there was a lot of opposition between these men, yet they had a uniformly agree on the translation. And if there was one abstention, then a footnote was added to the Bible and an explanation was given why it wasn't unanimous.
And it was rare. Mhmm. It was 47 different people agreeing on something. Imagine doing that today. Imagine doing that here.
[02:56:30] Unknown:
That ain't no. It never happened. You're right.
[02:56:34] Unknown:
So it's a pretty outstanding, statement that these guys who didn't I mean, you had the Puritans, you had the Anglicans, you the Westminster group, you know, you you had the Oxford group. I mean, this was a a group of people that, were all brainiacs and didn't necessarily agree on a lot of things, but they were able to put this thing together, which I think is a miracle.
[02:57:03] Unknown:
Did you actually send that to me or no?
[02:57:07] Unknown:
I didn't send it to you directly because I figure you get so many emails, you probably just lose it in the haze. So I could I could send it to you directly.
[02:57:19] Unknown:
Yeah. Okay. Please.
[02:57:22] Unknown:
But it'll probably be later today because I'm out and about here. So
[02:57:27] Unknown:
Alright. Well, yeah, I get a few 100 emails a day. But, I usually do have certain email addresses that raise red flags, or more accurately, urgent notifications. You know, I have I have some things that, you know, come from people that automatically go to a folder of attachments because they always have attachment.
[02:57:58] Unknown:
So
[02:58:01] Unknown:
I try to The other thing that the other thing that a few months ago, you I would I would argue with you with that the canon is complete. Well, I I'm really starting to doubt that these days, and, there's just so I mean, we're if you really look at the history of that, we're taking, of all people, the Catholic church on it. And even by the time of Luther, Luther's got a problem with a whole bunch of the books. A bunch of these guys did, but we pretty much ended up being the, the the Catholic canon. And what makes them an authority on canon? I mean, and if this is the argument that the God culture gives and says that that canon was actually kept by the the real Levites
[02:59:04] Unknown:
By by
[02:59:24] Unknown:
Let's see. There we go. I think that did it. Now what on earth happened here was that
[02:59:37] Unknown:
Muted the conference conference. This line cannot be unmuted.
[02:59:44] Unknown:
Hello.
[02:59:54] Unknown:
Weird.
[02:59:57] Unknown:
Okay. That was interesting. Who was that? Oh, don't know who that was. Alright. Are you, are you there, Samuel? I think after that, it's a pretty it's, like, basically a perfect time.
[03:00:29] Unknown:
I I muted because I I was echoing so badly.
[03:00:33] Unknown:
Yeah. Okay. Well, I think it's interject? Say what?
[03:00:40] Unknown:
I I'm on the call, and I have something to interject.
[03:00:45] Unknown:
K.
[03:00:47] Unknown:
Who's this? Yeah. Back to the back to the word sovereign earlier in this, phone conference. There's a law in United States Of America, and it's published in United States called volume one. And, it's article article two of the seventeen seventy seven confederacy, which is active, active law, general law and permanent law. In article two, it says that the state is sovereign. It doesn't say the law doesn't say that the people are sovereign. It says that the state that's created by Congress is sovereign. So, because the the the conference talked about the word sovereign when I first got on about two hours ago.
So, I wanted to interject that, what the law says, and and and it's not expressly delegated to congress. The sovereign state is is expressly not delegated to congress. So there's two parts of the state. One state is the land that was donated by congress, and the president of The United States signs it as the grand tour because, when the king lost the war, the revolutionary war of the thirteen colonies, those 13 colonies became 13 states. And all that land went to the private states. There was 13 of them at that time. And it wasn't owned by Congress. It was owned by the state. I don't know if that's comprehendible to anybody. But, but so congress had to create the constitution seventeen seventeen eighty seven.
That constitution that we all know of today, that's what created the the taxing law. And so the state can tax the inhabitants and tax their their citizen, but only only for the new states that we created about the Great Lakes, which is Ohio, Michigan, and, I don't know, there's several of them. The, the king relinquished those lands under the Paris a treaty of Paris. And, that that was the lands that became owned by United States of America, which is Congress. And they were owners of those lands, and a lot of migrants from the original 13 states migrated to the new states that Congress became owner of, and those are the lands that got taxed.
And that wasn't explained by Brent. And I know he knows it, but nobody raised the raised the issue to, for Brent to add that to the equation of sovereign. So so Congress is sovereign over their lands that they owned, that they acquired from the King of England. And and that's where Congress got the powers to tax the people, but they didn't get the powers to tax the people in the 13 states because Congress didn't own those lands. The states owned it, which is, was outside of the congress's they didn't have no power. Anybody have anything to say?
[03:04:43] Unknown:
The original third states were never territories. That land came directly from the king to each state individually, and Texas was never a territory either.
[03:04:57] Unknown:
Right. So there's a territory. The state has it's required by law in the, Northwest Ordinance to become a state. So all new states that became states to add to the original states. There is a criteria that congress created that the state to become a state. Now I'm from Oregon. Oregon became a state in eight a hundred years later, 1859. So 1859, Oregon, before before Oregon became a became a union state, 100% of, Oregon was called a provisional territory at the beginning. A 100% of the territory of Oregon was territory. Well, before Oregon became a union of 1859 to become a member of the union that was created in 1787.
That was the that was the creation of a union where where the states required to have a territory built into it. So Oregon today, when it became a union but before it became a union, the government, United States Congress, gave a lot of lands away by donation through act of congress. And and the other way that, the lands of Oregon was sold by the United States government for a price. And, usually, it was about a dollar an acre back in those days. And so the government of Oregon sold their land that they acquired from the king and became provisional government.
And in that equation, in the year of '27 1859, Oregon became a member of the Union States of 1789. So so but a lot of Oregon, when it when it became a union of of the states, there's the other land of Oregon that was private that either the government sold or they granted through a donation. And and some people are familiar with the term homestead. That that was another law that congress wrote, another donation of land under the Homestead Act. But, so there's two parts of Oregon, and there's two parts of every single state, and there's 50 states. I I I'm just rounded out. It might be 51, 52, whatever it is. Out of the 50 states, there's two lands within the state. One is private, and one is, territory.
And the territory is the one where the where The United States Of America owns it. And and Congress can only write laws in the in the in the lands within the state owned by United States Of America. Congress can only write laws to the lands that United States Of America owns. And outside of what United States Of America owns, only the private people that have private homes, or there could be private, shopping malls, but it's private land. Congress can't write law. And and that's in article two of seventeen seventy seven, not expressly delegated to congress.
But, Congress knows what it means, and, but the people at large, they don't know what that law says. How can So who can How
[03:08:35] Unknown:
go ahead. How how can the creator of something
[03:08:39] Unknown:
not be the sovereign of it? Oh, I agree with that. This the the highest sovereign in heaven and in earth is God almighty, but the people Well, we the people no. We the people created the government.
[03:08:52] Unknown:
Right. And, ultimately, God owns it all.
[03:08:55] Unknown:
Let me rephrase. We the people and outside of we the people are the so there's two we the people. One is, congress. Those people that ratified the states into That call themselves sovereign, but they aren't. Right. Well, they're a part of the state. So when you when you when you join up to be a a member of congress, that's the state. The members of the congress is the state.
[03:09:26] Unknown:
The enabling act, which this which the states had to submit to the federal government guaranteed a republican form of government and certain parameters that would fit into the constitution or they were rejected.
[03:09:43] Unknown:
Right. So so The United States
[03:09:48] Unknown:
okay. So my belief is that is within the constitutional context, the Right. The people the the body of the people are the sovereigns, not the individual. But, ultimately, Jesus Christ is the sovereign over it all, and that's the claim I make in my elodium.
[03:10:08] Unknown:
Okay. Okay. God God is sovereign, but the people of the earth and the Old Testament wanted a king. And if you read the story, God says, you don't want a king, but the people said, we want a king. And God says, we don't. So there's an argument. So, anyway, God gave him a king, and the first king on the earth for the for the Israelites was, Saul. And they mentioned it in this in this telephone conversation. They talked about Saul.
[03:10:44] Unknown:
Yeah. I I and and that's exactly what we did with the fourteenth amendment. We wanted a king.
[03:10:51] Unknown:
I have a king I have a king today called government, but the king in America is called the president. But he's a king, and he tries to tell me what to do. But he can't even tell me what to do on the private land that The United States Of America gave away. And I I live on a piece of land The United States gave away, and the president, granted it with his signature, and Congress wrote the act to do that. That was the powers of the president to give it away. And I have that act of Congress. It's the act of Oregon donation law, the act of 1850.
You can look it up yourself, the donation law for Oregon. It's it was written in the year 1850, and that's when the president of The United States Of America granted lands away for those that made the claim to receive the grant. So Yep. I I have that paper. And and Same as the land patent. Yeah. Yeah. It's what it land patent is another word for deed, but they changed the word land patent to deed. Today, they call it a deed. Oh. But the but the term used in the donation is a land patent, and it has certificate number. And so my certificate number is 5015.
And and and you can go to the county and get that number, which I did. I got the number. And so that was a certificate that was deposited into the vault of the land bureau, and and then it was somebody made a claim to get that number. And and this land that I live on is that claim. And the claim was granted by the president of The United States Of America in '18 I think mine was 1858. The the grants were were put into a deposit box in 1850, but it it might it took twenty, thirty years to get rid of all those certificate numbers. The certificate numbers was the claim, the I mean, the the grant.
So there's there's many, many grants, and, I don't know how many thousands there were, but but it it had a number assigned to it, and the numbers were surrendered when the president of The United States signed his John Henry to the claim and and gave it to the person that met the criteria to get the claim. There was a criteria that you had to had to meet to to receive that claim. And the criteria, one was five years to to clear the land. And then you had to meet the criteria of being married, and you had to meet the criteria of being a a citizen that's written in the act of congress.
And and when you met all the criteria, you had five years to put it together. And after five years, and you met the criteria, you got a you got a grant. It was it was given, but but you had to work for it. And and and then they and then it was the governor I mean, the the president of The United States Of America signed it over. He's the grant he's the grantor, and and the claimant was the grantee. And so that's how the law was written. And there's two laws on the land. One one is written and one is unwritten, but I just quoted a written law that nobody can disprove.
I I put into the air a written law that that, hey, it can be challenged, but it's written. You you can talk about a theory, but where's the written law for it? A lot of people talk, but it's not written. And God has a written law, which is the scripture, and God has an unwritten law. There ain't enough paper in heaven and earth to write all of his, all of his laws onto you. There's that many. So it's for you living an adventure of life is a is a discovery to learn what his unwritten law says. That's on us personally to find out what what what God what God says. But he wrote it in our hearts, And it takes the Holy Spirit to pull it out of our heart and show it to us.
But that's that's a personal relationship with God is the power of the Holy Spirit who says that he's our teacher, and he tells us the truth. It's it's written in the scriptures. He he's the truth, and he he's, yeah, he's our counselor And the most hated entity on the face of the earth is the Holy Spirit. Because the Holy Spirit is the power, and the earth doesn't want people to know that power. And and they they write everything in books and paper to make sure that nobody knows the Holy Spirit, and there's a counterfeit Holy Spirit called the charismatic spirit. That that's the counterfeit. It talks about it in in chapter 24 of Matthew. Talks about the counterfeit holy spirit that does false false signs and wonders.
[03:16:17] Unknown:
Yep. Charismatic church. Yeah.
[03:16:21] Unknown:
Yeah. And and the churches the churches the ecumenical churches are teaching, a false spirit.
[03:16:29] Unknown:
The family members are loaded with it. They're they're they've been going to charismatic Christian churches forever. Yeah.
[03:16:38] Unknown:
Yeah. Loaded with it. And you're right. Like King James. King James changed the changed the words. He hired these scholars, these script writers to change the words and make it sound nice
[03:16:51] Unknown:
and lovely. Yeah. Make it sound pretty. Pretty. Yeah. But then again, of course, he was a today. He was he was a a flamer anyway. So
[03:17:03] Unknown:
Well, he was gay too.
[03:17:05] Unknown:
Well, hello. That's what I'm talking about.
[03:17:10] Unknown:
Oh, okay. Well, you have to say the right word for me to know. Flamer.
[03:17:14] Unknown:
Flamer. But then again I didn't know that. But then again, then again, a a distant ancestor of mine, Frederick the Great. Yeah. Yeah. He, he spent a little too much time, watching his armies as well. So
[03:17:35] Unknown:
what the hell? So this this phone commerce conference is hosted branch to be on this conference?
[03:17:44] Unknown:
On Fridays. Oh, okay. Fridays. It's the I thought The Radio Ranch with cell phone. No. It's the Radio Ranch with hello? It's the Radio Ranch with Rogers Sales. Brent is a cohost on Fridays.
[03:18:04] Unknown:
Oh, okay. Well, this is the first time I've actually been on, and I was invited by somebody I know. Okay. He's listened. Yeah. So I that's why I have a question about how that works. And you just explained it. Thank you.
[03:18:23] Unknown:
This is the Radio Ranch with Roger Sales. We're here Monday through Saturday from eleven to 1PM eastern. And on Fridays, Brent joins Roger, and he basically takes the reins.
[03:18:37] Unknown:
He sure does. Yeah. Yes. He speaks with us. He speak he speaks with authority.
[03:18:46] Unknown:
Yeah. Well, they've been doing the Tasmanian word association hour for over ten years now. Almost fifteen.
[03:19:00] Unknown:
So are you mister Sales?
[03:19:04] Unknown:
No. No. That that was Roger.
[03:19:08] Unknown:
It was Roger before You're talking to goofy sales.
[03:19:13] Unknown:
Yeah. Right. Okay. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Anyways, speaking of which alright. I was trying to do this about eighteen minutes ago, but it is about time to take the stream down because we are still streaming. So thanks for joining us for the Radio Ranch with Rogers sales, the Friday edition, with cohost Brent Allen Winters. You can catch us on eurofolkradio.com, Global Voice Radio Network, rubble.globalvoiceradio.net. You can also catch us on Soapbox TV and, a veritable plethora of other platforms. For more information on the topics discussed, please go to our website, thematrixdocs.com. That's thematrix,d0cs,.com, and we can't wait until the next time you come out here to take a look, have a seat, and set a spell. Thanks for joining us.
Thank you. Blasting the voice of freedom worldwide, you're listening to the Global Voice Radio Network.
[03:20:36] Unknown:
Bye bye, boys. Have fun storming the castle.
Morning, Paul.
[00:00:23] Unknown:
Morning. Forward moving and focused on freedom, you're listening to the Global Voice Radio Network. This Mirror Stream is brought to you in part by mymitoboost.com for support of the mitochondria like never before. A body trying to function without adequate mitochondrial function is kinda like running an engine without oil. It's not gonna work very well. It's also brought to you by snapphat.com. That is snap,phat,.com. It's also brought to you by the Preif International terahertz frequency wand through iterraplanet.com. Thank you so much for joining us, and welcome to the program.
[00:02:28] Unknown:
Good morning, kids. Here we go again on the Old Radio Ranch, Roger Sales. It's the Friday edition with cohost Brent Winters when he I may be here already. Anyway, I think it's the November 14, about not too far away from that big day here. Big biggest holiday of the year. And, so here we go. November 14, Radio Ranch, Roger Sales, I got, and Brent Winters, I got my stuff out of the way. Paul, would you please be so kind just to identify and, the people that help us extend our reach, if you would, please?
[00:03:05] Unknown:
I can do that for sure. Thank you. Good morning, Roger. You sure? Yes. Yes. Our anchor platform is eurofolkradio.com. That is thanks to pastor Eli James. We are on radiosoapbox.com, Tuesdays through Fridays, so we're on that platform as well. We are on, Global Voice Radio Network. Radio.globalvoiceradio.net is our audio platform, and our video platform is rumble.globalvoiceradio.net. Our website is thematrixdocs.com, the matrixd0cs.com, and, free conference call is how people join us on the show. And all links to Eurofolk, Global Voice, and FCC are on the website.
Get out. That's about all I've got.
[00:03:59] Unknown:
Yikes. Do I see Brent up there? So it looks like he joined us. Yeah? Yes. He did join us. He's still muted, but he is there. There he is. Doctor Winters is what they ought to call you. Well, here we go. Going into the big weekend. Boy, there's a bunch of stuff happening, and, you just don't know, honestly. Brent, how are you doing this morning, my friend? Good, Roger.
[00:04:22] Unknown:
Paul sent me a link and asked me to listen to it, and I did. And he wanted, requested that I comment about it. I'm not in any hurry. I want to do it because he wants me to, but, there's other things you want to talk about. Maybe we ought to make a good ready as I used to say. I you know, I get up to speak and you hit your belt up and you shuffle your papers around and you say a few stupid words to try to get yourself out of the way before you can concentrate on what you're supposed to say, you know. But, if there's there's something else you'd like to talk about, we can do that.
[00:05:03] Unknown:
Oh, I don't know. There's much happening, Brent. I'm, I'd just throw it over to you. I know you don't keep up with the news. It's just a bunch of hogwash political stuff probably, but we're reaching some kind of a point that's been building for a long time. I e, earlier this week, I think, Monday, general Flynn, highly respected. You You know, he's not gonna come on there and BS you. General Flynn got on Alex and said, I've never gotten on with the sense of urgency that I have. And, and he says that we are going to experience something within the next ninety days. Now that's coming from general Flynn. K. I can see the other things. I was thinking about you this morning. Do you remember ever listening and hearing a guy named Bob Chapman?
No. Does that ring a bell with you? No. Uh-uh. No. He's gone now. Fortunately, he was big gold and silver guy. He owned the largest gold and silver brokerage house on Wall Street for almost thirty years, lived all over the world. And he used to get on the radio and tell you what's really going on, and died doing so, by the way. He was on his death bed. He was doing broadcast. Pancreatic cancer, I believe. But Bob Chapman used to say, you say, you'll there'll be a day when you'll see gold go up and down a $100 or more in a day. Uh-huh. Well, we saw it, didn't we? It's doing it right now. It's doing it today.
Yeah. It dropped a 100 a 100 and something dollars this morning. And, so evidently what's happened with the metals is there was this, run run up here just a short while back, couple of months. Mhmm. And, it ran up. That's when it ran up to, like, 4,500, and that overshot the the real price. And so there were profit takers, and now it's getting back up to that. Now get this, Brent. We talked about this earlier. Mhmm. Oh, what's his name? The guy tell you. My brain. He's very respected in the gold and silver industry. I just I can't believe I can't think of these names. He was on, and he was doing an interview with a gal named Judy Shelton. I don't know if that name rings a bell with you. Probably not. Right? Mhmm. Mhmm. No. She's a big gold bug that, Trump was touting. He had two of them, a male and a female when this is the first term, and he was trying to get her on the Federal Reserve Board. Well, they're trying to do the same thing again. Judy Shelton's very plugged in, but she was on this, on on this interview and said she said it on other interviews.
President Trump said on July 4 year, the two thousand two hundred and fiftieth anniversary, he's gonna revalue gold. Evidently, Trump made that statement. Mhmm. So, there's some exciting things, sitting out there. Now the problem is when they revalue gold, it'll get rid of some of the debt. It'll make some of us who had the foresight to buy it a while back and sit on it. It'll make us happy, but the rest of the world is going to be in in in a in a hell of a hand basket right at that point, unfortunately.
[00:08:13] Unknown:
But you can't do anything about it except try and protect yourself and you can't help others if you're not strong. Okay? Yeah. Yeah. Can't save the world if you can't pay the rent. That's, very true. A quote from, I don't know who said it. Morton Blackwell said it. That's the one I remember.
[00:08:29] Unknown:
But that's the way it works. That's right. True. So, anyway, we do the best we can. That's all happening. We're very fortunate in many ways to be alive and cognizant and cognitive here on these, forces and these things that are happening and playing out right in front of us because they're they're been wanting to live right now for thousands of years, man. Yeah. And behind it no. I I agree. It's exciting. Behind it all
[00:08:53] Unknown:
is something that's come to a head that I I like to stress to people because people's minds don't habitually go there. They ought to, but they don't. That what and ask yourself, what are the springs of all that's happening? Because there is a common spring of Yes. All human activity. Van Till made this point. Van Till was a was a, people called him a philosopher because they don't like the word, theologian, but he was professor of theology at Princeton for years. And, he was born on a dairy farm in Indiana in a Dutch community, Cornelius Van Till.
And after all of his years of teaching, a very measured man. I mean, he he was one of those kind of fellows that, the people in the highfalutin German theologians and philosophers were afraid of. He was that kind of a fellow, and people said about Van Till everything that he believed was in every sentence he wrote. He was one of those kind of guys. He was articulate to where you never had any you were never lost reading, but you had to really concentrate and stay with him. But you if you look close, you were never lost when he would say things. But Van Till made this point after all of his years of looking at the world and history and teaching. Of course, as a teacher, you get a lot of input from students because students come in fresh, don't know their backside from a $17 sunbonnet, and they ask easy important but well I should say, yeah easy, but questions that people that are academics often overlook.
That's the beauty about teaching if you if it's worked right. You're you're getting questions from people with fresh minds that are asking the obvious thing. I remember when I was in high school, they used to send the army around, and they'd get all us students in the auditorium. There were it wasn't like there were a lot of us, but we did have a little auditorium place. And then they'd send in somebody from the army, and they'd try to talk us into the whole they'd try to persuade us that what we were doing in Southeast Asia was right, and then, of course, persuade a few of the guys to think about trying to get in the army army somehow in the officer corps, join up or something.
I remember the fellow made a pitch. He was an army officer, very articulate and sharp looking, you know, and got all done. And, Betsy, Betsy Diller, her father was an oil man. He was an oil driller. And Betsy was, and still is, as far as I know, sweetheart of a gal. She just raised her hands and said, yeah. But she said, are we winning the war in Vietnam? Simple question. Nobody was asking at that time. And I thought even then when I was young, I said, wow. Why didn't I think of that? You know? Are we winning? We're we're there to win. Are we? Are we there to win? Maybe we aren't. Maybe that was the problem. Well, that was the way Van Till was too, and that's the way young people are. They just ask the question that has to be answered. And if you don't ask the right question, you're shot at getting the right answer. It's pretty slim. Yeah. Jesus Christ made that point when he said to the lawyer, he said, he he said, how do I enter the kingdom of heaven? He said, well, you know, you're a lawyer. You tell me. Jesus Christ said, you tell me, big boy.
And the boy said, the lawyer the law sharp, I call him in my translation. Law sharp said, love God, love your neighbor. And Jesus Christ said, well, okay. Whatever you think, that this do and you shall live. You think you can really do that? Of course. You can't do that. And you screw up once and you're guilty of all, he said. So he just let the man he want to he wanted to rest upon his morality to save him. That's Jesus Christ said, have at it, buddy. See if it works out for you. Jesus Christ never said God has a wonderful plan for your life, and here's how you get saved. He never said that, ever. And the reason was because he knew, being the maker of heaven and earth, that, for a man to be safe and from hell, he first has to come to grips with he first has to come to come to grips with the idea that he can't be a good person because he's not a good person. And if you don't come to grips with that idea, if God doesn't slam you down on your knees, if you're not to the point you're kissing the dirt, well, you'll never come to that conclusion. Well, so how do you do that? Well, you throw a man back on the law.
Because when you throw a man back on the law of God, if he is, able, he will see that he's not even coming close. I talked to a lady once, a friend of my friends. She had been raised in Arden, Roman Roman church. Her ardent Roman church family. They were immigrants in our part of the world. Her father was a coal miner. He came there to work in the coal mines, and they were of that Hopish persuasion. I remember talking to her when I got older and she treated me like her own son. We we I loved the woman and she loved me. That kind of thing. I was her boy's best friend, you know. And so she took care of me. But a discussion about keeping the 10 Commandments. I said, Do you think you can really keep the 10 Commandments? Is that what you're depending upon to safen yourself from eternal hell?
She said, Yes, I do. Well, I liked it. That's now she's gone now, but that's the height of arrogance, just between me, you, and the fence post. That's the height of arrogance. And that kind of that kind of attitude, God's not going to wink at. He's not going to put up with that. And he does. Attitude, God's not going to wink at. He's not going to put up with that. And he doesn't. Well, anyway, this lawyer asked the question or or that he said to the lawyer, threw it back on him. He said, love God, love your neighbor. And he said, this do and and thou shalt live.
If you're gonna be that stupid, you're asking the wrong well, then he said this. The lawyer said, yeah. But he said, who is my neighbor? Now that was the wrong question. And Jesus Christ points that out in spades. Jesus Christ makes the point to the fellow that ought to know about ought to know better that if you don't ask the right question, you're not even gonna come get no closest answer answer. When I was in law school, I used to try to go to the med school was across across this quad and on the other side, and it was a research med school. I'm pretty highfalutin place, but I would go there to study. You only get one exam in law school. You only get one exam at the end of the semester. And if you don't pass that exam, well, you're screwed. I just get one shot at it. So I'm over there, and my one shot's coming. I forget which class it was. Well, I just couldn't study around. I'm I'm one of those kind of guys that I like to talk to people too much, and a man that has too many friends will come to ruin.
A man that has too many friends will come to ruin. That's from the bible book of Proverbs. That's the way I was in law school. I had too many friends, so if I was going to study, I had to get away from everybody and I'd go over there. I didn't know anybody at the med school. I go there once a semester, and I'd study for the exam. I was sitting in there in a cubicle, and there was another fellow on the other side of the cubicle. I didn't know him. He was in the med school, I guess. Pretty big fellow. And he was there for a few hours. Finally, he said, you must be studying for an exam. I said, yeah. I am.
I'm over to law school, and I'm trying to study. And, I said, what are you doing? Yeah. I said the same thing. I'm studying for an exam. Well, I said, well, I bet you got a lot to do. He said, well, I suppose you're like me. You gotta memorize a lot of stuff. I said, what do you mean? He said, I'm I have to memorize every over 200 bones, and I have to no. I have to memorize all their Greek names. The Greek name the medical medicine shot through with Greek term because of our and because of the writings of the Greeks on the subject and quite a few of them by the way. Well any rate, he said I suppose you got to memorize a lot of stuff too. And I said no I don't got to memorize nothing. He said, you don't? He said, what are you studying for? I said, well, what I have to do be able to do on my exam is ask the right questions. I don't have to give the right answers, but I gotta ask the right questions. And if I don't ask the right questions, then I don't get any credit on the exam.
He said no kidding. I said yeah. I said it's been quite a quite a paradigm shift for me to understand that life is all about asking the right questions and that's exactly what Jesus Christ told this fellow. And by the way our common law traditions likes that too. You've got to be able to ask the right questions to live in this cruel world. And if you don't get into that mindset, you're just going to continue to be a screwball. And your life's going to be miserable. More more it's going to be miserable. And well, I shouldn't say that. Life is full of trouble. You're going to have trouble, but it'll be, to the degree you don't know it'll ask the right question. Well, bet Betsy Diller asked the right question.
Old Betsy, and what a gal. She just said, why are we winning? That's simple enough. The right question's a simple question. We don't have to get complicated about it. You don't have to be an academic. You don't have to study logic to ask the right question. That's the beauty of Christianity. Well, Roger, are you gonna say something? No. No.
[00:18:25] Unknown:
Just sitting here listening. I want to hear what the answer was. I was going to say though, if you ask the right question, you also better know the definitions of the words that are given you as an answer.
[00:18:38] Unknown:
Oh, well, sure. Sure. But we've got to get to the right question first. I guess we can get to that some later. I don't want to miss talking about what Paul wants me to talk about too, but getting back to that. So Jesus Christ said to this law sharp, he said, well, what do you think? You're the smart guy here. He said, love God, love your neighbor. Oh, okay. But then he was trying to trying to it says he he was seeking to justify himself. And then he said after the text says seeking to justify himself, that's always a bad thing to do, by the way. Justify yourself. Nobody cares. Did you know that? I'm talking to everybody, not you, Roger.
Nobody cares, about justifying yourself. God certainly doesn't care. And matter of fact, it just ticks him off and it'll tick off your mother and your father and anybody else you're responsible to growing up. They don't wanna hear you to justify yourself unless they ask specifically, and you're able to articulate it. But by and large, those that have authority over you like God himself, he just wants you to shut your blasted mouth and do what he tells you to do and think think it through, and you'll figure it out after you learn how to obey after you learn how to obey. But, you first have to discern and ask the right question. Well, he said to this lawyer, what he had said. Oh, yeah. Then the lawyer says, well, bear you out, but who's my neighbors? In other words, all he was saying was, I'm gonna justify myself by defining things a certain way like I want. You know, whoever, as you mentioned, Roger, but coming back to the question, whoever defines terms wins the argument, say. So that's what this smart aleck was trying to do.
He was trying to to define terms with the maker of heaven and earth and the giver of the law. That's Jesus Christ. That's what the bible says. It's not said often enough, but that's what the book says. Well, he said, well what do you mean? And he said, I have done all these things and I'm a good guy. That was the idea, you know. And Jesus Christ said there was a man. There was a man, some man, a certain man the text says. It could be translated certain some. A man, a certain fella went down went from Jerusalem going from Jerusalem to Jericho and he was on the Jericho Road. You see the Jericho Road runs from up higher elevation Jerusalem down toward the Jordan River going east and it's a it's a pretty straight shot. We'll have to go through the mountains that winds your hand a little bit. And a lot of a lot of brigands hang out on the Jericho Road.
And, this fellow was going and he going along, and, the brigands, the robbers waylaid him, beat him, it says, half to death. The word there half to death means he was on the very brink of death. Now we learned, for example, I remember learning that, once your body temperature reaches a certain point going down, and I think it's 87, long in there, that's the point of no return. And if it gets below whatever that point is, somewhere down in there, then it's all over but to cry. And you can't bring a man back. He may be he may live a while longer, but it's all over. Well, the word that, Luke and by the way, and this is fascinating. Doctor Luke, the physician, uses a word there from the the the from a medical term of art to describe a man who is at that very point of no return.
The medical term. And he's the one that recorded that book and he said he was on the he was on the, right half dead half dead zone. That's I guess that gets it pretty good, but along comes this, half breed. You know, to be a half breed is to be somebody that is in great derision with the people around him. In America if you were a half breed anything at one time it was pretty bad. People wouldn't have anything to do with you and that's the way it was with these Samaritans. They were half breed Israelites, half breed Israelites, and they lived in a place called Samaria. The Samaritan comes along.
However, the priest comes along, then the Levite, and of course they passed by on the other side, didn't want to get near him because he looked like he was dead. The law of God says don't get near a dead body. Don't touch it. So they went on the other side. It's not where it's not that they did something awful wrong. That wasn't the point of the story. That's what the law of God said, and they really believed that. And by the way, that's what the law of God still says. Don't be touching dead bodies. It's dangerous. Dead animals, be careful who does it and how. That's it tells you how to handle that stuff, but the law of God, the law of God, it's eternal.
And when I was on the farm, I was careful. We'd have to bury livestock, cattle, pigs, dog, you know, whatever's dead, whatever got tore up by a coyote or a wolf or whatever. And, we were very careful not to touch the dead bodies. It's just stupid to do that. Well, that's what they did. And then along come the Samaritan, and he sees the fellow over there, the half breed. All the Israelites hated the Samaritans, and well, they were half breeds, and they lived over there by themselves. They didn't go to Jerusalem. They worshiped in Mount Gerizim and all those kind of things. But the Samaritan stopped and poured wine and oil into his wounds and bound up his wounds and put him up on his own little donkey and took him to a nearby inn and gave him to the innkeeper and said take care of this man and I come back I'll pay you what I owe you but you know nurse him back to health if you can. And then Jesus Christ after all that says now listen this this is the point.
Who was neighbor? He asked the law sharp, who was neighbor to him who fell among thieves. Now that wasn't the question the law sharp asked. You see the law sharp said who is my neighbor? Well, that's the wrong question. You got to ask the right question if you're going to get to the right answer. And the right question was in that story, who was neighbor to him that fell among thieves? Well, the law sharp didn't want to answer the question cause it was too painful. Finally, he begrudgingly and again, the Greek text makes it clear using words that make it clear that he begrudgingly mumbled.
He did he wouldn't even say the word Samaritan. That like, that's like getting a dirty taste in your mouth. So he said, he who had mercy on him. He kind of mumbled it. That's the words used there to indicate the mumbling of this guy who wouldn't say Samaritan. He wouldn't justify himself. Well the question the the point of the story and I shouldn't say story. It's something that really happened. It wasn't a parable. It's called the parable of the Samaritan or the good Samaritan. It it it wasn't a parable. And the reason you know it wasn't a parable because every parable starts with a simile. It'll say something like the kingdom of heaven is like or as the kingdom of heaven is like or as a man who bought a field. The kingdom of heaven is like or as a woman who lost a coin in her house. The kingdom of heaven is this the like or as, but it doesn't say that. It says a certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho. This was something in the news, something they heard about. And when a fella gets waylaid in the mountains around well, you know, it was that way in in, Virginia City, Nevada back in the days of Silver. They all know the roads coming in were dangerous, and if anybody got killed or way later robbed, if if they got back to town, they'd spread the news. And and, of course, then the posse go out looking for them. Well, that's the way it was in Jerusalem. That was a hilly, lonely road going to Jericho. And they knew the news. They knew what had happened to this fella. He was talking about something in the news when Jesus Christ said that, but he pointed out by without saying it, he said, you've asked the wrong question. The question in life and I've I get real practical about that for myself and I have the question in life. When I first saw this I said, wow. I'll tell you what I did. The question in life is not who is my neighbor so I can justify myself and go help my neighbor.
It's not Christianity is not a moral order. No. No. No. No. Christianity is an order about who Jesus Christ is. He'll take care of the morality and he'll work it out for you. Whatever you think morality is. Matter of fact, the word moral doesn't appear in the bible any place. Morality, moralist, moral. Why? Because it's a word that means custom. It doesn't even mean what is an eternal standard. And God's all about law, not morality. Morality is you can make your you can make a dog well, I'm gonna go that far, but let me get back to the point. So the question in your life is not who is my neighbor so you can go help him and justify yourself by being a good person. The question in life is who is neighbor to him that fell among thieves? Now who who is the one that fell among thieves? That's you. You're the one that's beat up. You're the one that the the law cannot help.
It's not that the law is bad. You shouldn't touch dead bodies. No. That's true. It's that but that can't that will never get you into eternal safety, the kingdom of God. That will never do that. The law is not there to do that. The law is there to bring to bring conviction to the non Christian man and to give a guidance for a decent life to the Christian man. That's what it's there for. But it will not bring you into the kingdom. That's what God does. So who was the Samaritan in the story? If the guy that's beat up is you, who the Samaritan? Well, just before that, they'd been calling Jesus Christ a half breed Samaritan, the product of a of a Samaritan whore and a a Roman soldier at the local garrison. That's who they said Jesus Christ was. And still do. And still do. Yeah. And, but they have worse things to say than that. Well, it's written in the Talmud.
How half breed of Samaritan is bad enough, but they, they got worse things to say. But at any rate, that's true. That's true. But at any rate, he, they made that accusation against him. He said, okay, here's a Samaritan. He helped this guy. See that that really he wanted to get their attention. He was Jesus Christ is the he's not a Samaritan, but in the story, the Samaritan represents him because he of the of the order of Melchizedek, which is above the order of of, Levi, he has the power to save a man from hell, and he did. He he did what was necessary to bring that about, But he didn't he kept the law perfectly.
That's true. And if he hadn't have done that, he would have been the perfect sacrifice, and he still keep the law perfectly in thought and deed. He is god immortal immortal. And having done that, he is the Samaritan. And, but he says to us as a practical matter, ask the right question. So I, when I first saw that decades ago, I said, wow. And by the way, that's not a new point. I mean, the church has been teaching that for decades. It's just that most of the church doesn't pay attention. So when you hear things about the parable called falsely called the parable of the Samaritan, people say, Oh, well, that means that, I'm supposed to help my neighbor. And my neighbor is anybody that needs help. That's hogwash. That's not even true. But as a matter of fact, you can't even do that. And if you're stupid enough to do that, you're gonna get yourself in a lot of trouble. Jesus Christ never said that.
Just we as mere weak mortals, we want to justify ourselves so bad. We're trying to find some way we can be good little boys and girls and make God love us, and that ain't gonna happen either. Your dad and mom do not love you, never did love you because you did everything they said. They love you because you were the air the the the the babies of their own bodies, as they say in Northern and then they say in Yorkshire. And on up into Scotland, you are their you are your parents' barons. I say that for the sake of Paul in case he's listening. I want him to know I'm trying to learn his dialect a little bit. The barons, that that's short of contraction in the old country for born ones. Born of my own body. That's what g that's what the bible calls that's what the bible calls us in the book of first John, my barren, my born ones. That's a good translation just that us Americans don't know what it means.
I try I put it as just born ones, but that's who we are. We don't we don't gain favor with God because we're good and or bad or no. We have favor with God. He wants us to do what he tells us to do, but that's not what puts us on solid footing. I'm I'm on solid footing with my father because I'm his son. Period. Do you really think that my father's always been happy with me? I can tell you right now there's a lot of things, and as he'll be 100 years old in a few months, and he's still there. And there's a lot of things he's disappointed very disappointed with me about. But I'm still my father's son, and that's obvious when he talks to me.
And that's the way it is with you, friends. Get out of these evil legal systems. Is the law important? Yes. For decency of the Christian man, as I've said, and for condemnation of the non Christian man. That's what the law is for. But it will not safeen you from eternal hell. Now that you know that much, you maybe can understand the parable. And that was the parable of of the of the, not the parable. Here I am saying it. See, the evil empire will the evil empire and the useful idiots out there of the a lot of preachers will twist that into a moral story. You know, there's not one parable or story. Not one parable or story that Jesus Christ ever told to teach a moral lesson. Not one.
Every one of them was to teach more about who he was, and that's what that that, story of the Samaritan is about, teaching who he is. He is the savior, the only one who can safe him forever. And he is the Samaritan in that story, even though he wasn't a Samaritan. He was making fun of him. And he was he was condemning the man who was not asking the right question. You gotta ask the right question to get to the right answer. Well, Roger, the other thing that's come up, then it's all over. I mean, it's exploded.
[00:32:47] Unknown:
I'm sorry. Roger, go ahead. Yeah. Oh, I wanna ask a question. What was the answer to to her question if they were winning Vietnam? Do you remember?
[00:32:54] Unknown:
Oh, no. He hummed around. I remember that. He never answered the question. Good old Betsy. I shouldn't say old Betsy. She was a peach of a gal. I could tell you a lot of stories about her dad was an oil driller. I've told the stories about him. He he was something else. Clever, clever man. Well, no. Never did answer the question. And, of course, to answer the question would have been embarrassing to try to answer it because the policy there wasn't to win, as you know. The policy there was to contain and all the foolish things that happened and and the despair we saw, I bet we all Yeah. Those of us that were there. I don't think there were any metrics to decide victory. It's just like
[00:33:35] Unknown:
craziness
[00:33:36] Unknown:
for years. Yeah. And they were just making a lot of money. I mean, the simplicity of it was Yeah. I guess. LBJ's wife, Lady Bird, was a large shareholder in Bell Helicopter. Right. That's just one thing. And of hundreds of thousands of people making money just and young men dying. As one fellow said, I think, I don't know who said it, but we never lost a a major battle in Vietnam. But that doesn't make any difference. Now my brother told me, just on the side note here, he went to the naval war college a hundred years ago, and he came back and I said, what'd you learn?
He said two things. Well, what are they? Well, number one, all other things being equal, absent an act of God, numbers always win. More equipment, more arms, more men, that always wins. And of course he said the exception is an act of God and that has happened a lot of times in history. And the battle of Tours France would be one place when that happened where the Islamic fords were stopped. And that was not expected to happen because they had the numbers. But, without that, numbers always win. Number two. Number two, any war fought for anything other than dirt will come to nothing.
This this is this is, profound to me. I mean, it comes right to the heart of the Bible. The Bible is all about land, all about land. The trust settlement of God is all about land, the entrusted property, the land the Lord our God has given us. That's all it's about. Now that will bring us to another point. But right now, just to make the point, Vietnam wasn't fought for dirt. They weren't fighting for dirt. They weren't taking territory. And we, right or wrong, we went to war with Germany, but we fought for dirt. We took the territory.
Right or wrong, when Japan it was we were after dirt. We hopped the islands till we got there, and then we said we want the whole blast of caboodle, unconditional surrender, nothing less. And we did. We took we took the place. We took over. And then when things, settled down, we turned it back so they could go ahead and live their lives, an act of magnanimity. But it has to be for dirt, and in Vietnam, we weren't doing that. We were they were telling the boys in Vietnam we've got to win the hearts and the minds of the people. No. We gotta kill our enemies and take dirt. And if we don't do that, we're going to waste lives, blood, and treasure, and enemy and and and our enemies won't be defeated, and that's exactly what happened. That's exactly what happened. Land. And God says everything in his book. He tells us this. Everything relates back to his land. He is the allodial landlord and there's nothing in the Bible that does not relate directly to his established trust settlement with us as beneficiaries, his elect, as the Bible says, is chosen, and beneficiaries and trust settlements are always chosen by the seller.
I I don't have to explain that. First, we establish the fact of the matter. The fact of the matter, you take the evidence and you establish the fact of the matter. And once you do that, then you can move to try to explain it or understand it. But right now, it's important that I believe. I believe all I know that Jesus Christ said so. When he make the declarations, that's the end of it. That's called a decree. It's called a dogma in the Greek. That's a Greek word. That means I'll tell you the way it is without giving you any reasons right now. Alright. We only have two dogmatic, two dogmatic institutions in our universe. One of them is the maker of heaven and earth.
And all judgment right now has been given to Jesus Christ, by the way. By by a power of the Godhead, they gave all that to that member of the Godhead. A second is the jury. God established the jury on Earth, a 12 man jury, and gave them the power of dogma, the power of arbiter. That means that their decisions are not are not once they've made their decision on the facts of the case, that's the end of it. It's not even appealable. Of course, even our Constitution of The United States says that amendment seven. Why? That's our common law tradition. That's why it's a Christian tradition. Well coming back to asking the right question, that's the important thing. And here's the right question with respect to what is now dominating the world, not just America, the world.
And that is the question about the state of Israel. So there's a lot of questions are being asked. It's dominating right now, no question. I can't avoid it. And it's gonna be more so. It's just growing. I don't know, Roger, that it could be much more so. I think it's it's it's conclusive at this point, and there's two reasons for it. Well, that's conclusive. Even the question the the right question is not being asked even by those that are right headed. That's in my humble opinion. And the question is, who is Israel? Who is Israel? And if you can answer that question right, everything else falls in place. We just follow from that answer, but that's not being done. Now go ahead, Roger. They don't want the answer to that. Well, obviously not. It's getting to a point where there's a clear cut line of demarcation.
[00:38:52] Unknown:
And the question is, are you an Israeli firster or are you an America firster? And it's the it's the battle for the future of the Republican Party. And I dare I say from the pollsters and stuff I listen I've see on, you know, talking about this that Trump's rating has just absolutely stepped off a cliff in the last two, three weeks I understand. With the younger people especially.
[00:39:19] Unknown:
Yes. Yes. And here's what's happened. We have a younger crowd that are, just they're, unexperienced because they're younger. They don't know what the older crowd knows. They don't have the baggage, the conscience baggage they have, and they're just asking simple questions just like Betsy when we were in high school. Well, are we winning?
[00:39:42] Unknown:
I didn't
[00:39:43] Unknown:
when when when miss Betsy asked that question, that was a turning point in my life. And I said, yeah. Miss Betsy's right. What what what's going on here? And I've never never quit thinking that way about that particular part of American history. I I like the question. Instead, are we winning, I like the question, what are we there for? Well well, that was that was a big one too as you remember. Yeah. It was a little country Joe and the fish. One, two, three. What are we fighting for? Remember that? Yeah. Don't know. Don't give a damn. Next stop is Vietnam. Yeah. Five, six, seven. Open the pearly gates. Don't need to wonder why we're all gonna die.
[00:40:21] Unknown:
Thank you, country Joe. Hold on. Hold on, Brent. Yes, Larry. Good morning.
[00:40:30] Unknown:
Good morning. I've got two questions for you, Brent. You mentioned the low deal title. There's Samuel often talks about that we can't achieve a lodial title, that it's a lodium. What's the difference between a lodium and a lodial title? And the next thing is, I listened to your first presentation on the common law. I mean, on the, on the trust class Mhmm. The other day, a couple days ago, and you mentioned that that there's two types of property. There's immovable property and movable property, and Mhmm. You used a couple of words to describe that. One of the words is the immovable property, like land. You refer to it as real something.
And, you know, there's this guy that was going around. I believe he he's deceased now, but he was going around in Florida, and he figured out how to get, I guess, a lodium title so so you don't have to pay property taxes in Florida. And one of the things he did was he he figured out that on the property records, they are they are ascribing a definition of real estate to per you know, to home properties. And what that does is it's, causing it's causing, you know, you to have to pay property tax because if you own real estate, that's a commercial term. And so by getting rid of that term real estate and, off the property rolls, you're able to achieve what he calls a lodium title. So I was wondering what your thoughts are on all that. Is it okay to call something real estate?
[00:42:21] Unknown:
Well, real estate is a it's a term, common law, real property, and what it is, it's distinguished from land. They're both the same thing, but then within the within land, there is real property and land. And real property is a word that, that, signifies developed land. In other words, I've built a house on it. I've built a livestock barn on it. That becomes real estate, but that's not a hard fast distinction. And to get caught up in that kind of minutia, like you're talking about that guy in Florida, just silliness. And while I find it, I I I the older I get, the stronger I get about that, just calling things silly. What I find about that in most cases, and I don't know who the fellow is and I don't want to demean anybody, but I want to point out if I have the opportunity, don't waste your time.
You're not you. I mean, anybody. I'm just speaking. When you ask questions, I I talk to everybody, not just the person who's asked the question. So I'm not criticizing you for asking it. I like I'm glad you asked the questions, and then we can talk about it. But, people that do that, they they come across and they become gurus of sorts. And now that way, no. What they've done is, in most cases, they just know a lot of minutia, but they don't know why, and they're not connecting it to any any universal. And all that minutia not connected to a universal is meaningless and it'll lead you into madness.
You know, you Where? You keep the main thing the main thing as Jesus Christ said, you you Pharisees have omitted the weightier matters of the law. The weightier matters, and I don't care what you call it or what and all that minutia and the names you give it and the distinct you draw, doesn't mean anything. If you've not captured or the weightier matters of the law haven't captured you. Now I, I'm a lawyer. I don't go into court and worry if something if there's a bureaucratic problem, I I immediately brush that aside and I go to the fundamentals.
For example, just brush it aside and go, wait a minute. This guy has a right to remain silent. That's a fundamental. Wait a minute. This guy has a right to a jury trial. That's a fundamental. Why? And then I wanna know why. How? Why? Elodial title. People talking about elodial title is only elodium. Elodium is a Scandinavian German word. It's from our common law tradition. A Germanic is a better word, Scandinavian Germanic word and Celtic word. All the same people, different tongues. The Celts have a very much different tongue. Nobody knows why, but they do. But they, they had what they called the, the Aled. That's the land itself that, is owned by, who has a lodial title.
A a lodial title is to an alad. The word oolodium, just another, root word, and to try to draw fine distinctions between things like a lodium, that's just silly. By the way, a lodial title historically among our, among the people of our culture, that's going back to those tribes, only belong to the to the sovereign only. You say, well, I'm the sovereign. No, you're not. You're not the sovereign. And that sovereign movement, sovereign man on the land is dangerous and false. It never it never existed. There's only one sovereign, only one sovereign, and that's the maker of heaven and earth. And the other sovereign only acts Roger, I'll I'll stop just a second. Okay. I know. I wanna let you talk. I don't wanna try to over override you here. But one more thing. No. The the sovereign, as I mentioned a while ago, the sovereign is the arbiter. There are only two in the universe that God has authorized. One is himself, the Godhead, and the other one is the 12 man jury. And that's only down here on land. That's it. That's sovereign. And the expression of sovereignty comes in our common law tradition, through, the, the Godhead, two institutions, the Godhead, that three, three person panel and the 12 man jury. That's it.
Boy, the simplicity cut and get, not, not talking to you again. You asked the question, but just, we need to get off all of my new shit and get back to fundamentals. When I teach those courses, I try to major on. Okay, Roger, go ahead. Well, I was just gonna say, I got this out of the old real estate book. The word estate means less than true ownership. Well, that's, that's a French. It's a French word. Yes. And it does mean that's the law of French. The Normans brought it to England. Estate means less than two ownership, true, true ownership, unless you're talking to the sovereign. But let's think with us beyond, does, does any, any of us who have fee simple title to land like a house or what, farmland? That mean we have absolute absolute unlimited right to do anything we want on that land? And the answer is no.
Affirmatively. Shouts. No. You can't murder somebody on your land. It's against the law. And just to make an obvious point, I all title, down here on land is subject to the elodial landlord. And the elodial landlord is Jesus, the Christ that shouts throughout the Bible. That's why he came. That's why he, he he, gave up his life to pay the penalty for our law breaking so that we can join with him in that. Not only as trustee, not only as beneficiaries but as under trustees. But every trustee, even Jesus Christ himself, there's a limit.
There's a limit that he has from his co equal members of the Godhead as to what he is supposed to do and not supposed to do. And we as under trustees of land, real estate and land, we are limited by the terms of our trusteeship. And that's why it's sometimes called stewardship. In our common law tradition, our common law tradition is not arithmetic. It's not algebra. It's not equations that are cut and dried. No. Not even a little. You look at the words in our common law tradition, they just kinda flow. Why? Because we're men and God gives it to us that way and it's all about evidence. But getting back and words are important. Yes. Of course, we lose the meanings of words. We lose our lives, liberty, and our property.
But, the fixed meaning of a word never changes. But the range of meaning is usually pretty broad. How it's used with that fixed meaning still being intact. You learn that in bible translation. Without that, there's no limit to anything. There has to be limits to words and the fixed meaning. Oh, Paul wants to say something. I know. He's chomping at the bit. Go ahead, Paul.
[00:48:52] Unknown:
Yeah. I I think who, Larry is referring to is Steve Emerson. And what he did was he poured through the, codes of Florida, and he found a statute that stated that they cannot tax a person's residence unless it is in used in the furtherance of a business or a commercial activity. And then through the definition of real estate, they, have impugned the definition of commercial property on everything. So what he did was he went in, and he rebutted the fact that they were claiming he was operating a business when in fact he wasn't.
[00:49:33] Unknown:
It was And I will predict I will predict nowhere with those arguments. Now and I'm not saying it's not right. I'm just saying there's got to be something more to it than playing a goofy game, going to a bunch of codes and trying to parse everything like it's a algebraic equation that'll never work. It doesn't work. It doesn't work on the course. The judge judges don't even know what you're talking about. It's a waste of a man's life to do that. And we had a guy back with a tax code. What was his name? He went to jail for quite a long time. Nice fella. And I'm not, no, it wasn't Schiff, but, and I wouldn't, and he's a smart guy, a nice guy, and I'm not against people doing that if it helps. But as a general thing and to be, you're wrong headed to think that's gonna help. You know, Larry Beecraft made the point of his life to know more about the internal revenue code than any man alive.
And he does. And of course he practices in that area of law, but I'm, I'm making the point, what has that got? What has that got us? There's got to be something bigger than the the the puny, goofy statutes of 435 political hacks. I mean, you take like we say, boys, let me say it all, my mother and them say, you got one boy, you got a brain. You got two boys, you got half a brain. You got three boy, three boys, you got a third of a brain and all and so on. Well, you got four thirty five political hacks. You've got one four hundred and thirty fifth of a brain. And I don't say that lightly. I was full bore and in the political arena running for office and I'd got a serious taste of what that does to a man. I mean it, you, you may as well put your brain in a five gallon bucket and fire a 45 slug into it. These fellows and they're in the gals, they're there in politics. They've only got time to do one thing and that's campaign.
No, they don't have time to contemplate. They don't have time to read books. No, that's not part of it. That's why they grow stale. That's why they get to looking weird. That's why Nancy Pelosi is out of her mind. She's lost her mind. It was never there to start with my opinion. She was wrong headed, but after all those years, the things she's saying and doing, even showing herself naked on the internet, she's nuts. What? That's what it'll do for you. That this is dangerous business that destroys your personality.
[00:51:48] Unknown:
Damn. Don't even give me that memo. That's that's the stuff of nightmares.
[00:51:52] Unknown:
That's the stuff my nightmares are made of. Oh, that's why Anyway, Steve is Yeah. According according to Steve Emerson, Brent, it did work for him, but what he had to do was he had to sit down with the tax assessor, and he had to know enough about the code and know enough about the law to be able to immediately rebut verbally everything that that tax assessor tried to pull out of his butt. And he was successful in doing it, and he was also successful in showing his friends how to do it. So he's got, like, a Goodbye. Like, an entire block that are not on the tax rolls, but he's never made a claim that that gave him, a right in the property.
[00:52:35] Unknown:
Well, if he can show me proof of that, maybe. I've never seen proof of it, and I've heard I've been around it for thirty, forty years of patriots doing that kind of stuff. And I say and then they come up and say, well, that worked for me, and I did this, and then they'd make a lot of money to well, I wanna see the proof. And if I can't see it, I'm not gonna buy it. But Well, it ain't gonna do him too much good when DeSantis if he gets his property bill passed down there where nobody has to pay it anymore. Well, that that's a good idea. And that's where we need to go in that direction. And the people that are raising Cain about it, like Emerson, I'm all for him raising Cain any way he can. I'm just talking as a matter of law. What I'm telling people don't I would tell people don't waste your time beating your head against the wall. We need something bigger than that. Listen, Christianity is not about this is Christianity.
They're not about reforming anything. It's about replacing everything. We gotta be more radical and say, well, I'm gonna get my name off it. No. No. No. There has to be just a a fell swoop of reality and it's coming. It seems I can feel it in a lot of areas. You know, who would ever thought that, the new supreme court would reverse Roe v Wade almost unexpectedly? Whoever thought that the federal circus would start to say, well, if you if you, if you're not a if you're, a non violent felon, you didn't, you don't lose your, second amendment rights. Right. Who'd ever thought those And it's happening more and more. I see it. Who'd ever thought that judge Pozner, a hardcore Jewish left wing judge would give the Illinois legislatures only 180 to pass legislation about concealed carry or, he'd do it for him.
I don't know that that's, the, the way to handle that problem, but his attitude changed for whatever reason. I don't know. You know, here's a good,
[00:54:23] Unknown:
example of the turnaround. You know, usually, when you unleash government with something, it just continues to grow. Uh-huh. Well, with last year's Chevron decision, we actually curtailed the the power they'd given to administrative agencies. They're going in and backing that off a little bit from their, any way they wanna go to what degree. So that, you know, there are a few good thing. That's pretty important right there really. Yeah. There are good things happening. And I know I I sound,
[00:54:51] Unknown:
I sound extreme and vicious sometimes. I consider talking here on Radio Ranch a bit of an in house discussion among patriots. And so when I say things, I'm not against anybody out there like mister Emerson or the fellow out in, state of Oregon that recently passed away, trying to do that. But then when I hear that they actually were successful, I've never ever seen any proof of that. And that brings me to another point, Paul, and I appreciate you sending me that clip about, the lost ending of the Lord's prayer. And we can go to that whenever you want to, but we're coming up the top of the hour, Roger, and we ought to
[00:55:31] Unknown:
let people know who we are, I suppose. Well, I want you to do that. I was watching the clock and trying to get you sandwiched in there, and I got a couple of minutes to freewheel. So Yeah. Why don't you go ahead and do that? And then I do want I've I've got an example and and a little more, a little more discussion on this property rights thing because people equate it with income tax, I think. Go ahead.
[00:55:54] Unknown:
Well, no. Well, okay then. My my name is Brent. Brent Allen Winters. Commonlawyer.com. Www.commonlawyer.com. And you can go to the website commonlawyer.com. You can, take the law classes we offer there. I try to teach the classes that I should have been taught in law school. And there are a lot of classes. I was taught in law school that were good common law classes. In fact, the first year was all common law classes. And it's been many decades now, and I've learned a lot about what I was taught and things that, should have been taught that wasn't. But then again, they didn't have all the time in the world. You only got three short years there.
But I try to teach those courses. You can go to the website commonlawyer.com, and I think there are a dozen or 13 courses that we've taught over the last many ten years or more. Some of them are very long. Some of them we took a year to teach every week. Some of them just twelve weeks. Some twenty three weeks. It depends upon the course. We try to keep them down to twelve. We taught that course on Magna Carta. That thing was over 50 presentations long. I got into it cause by cause and blow by blow, and I just couldn't stop. It was enjoyable. And and I, of course, I learned more than anybody when I teach the courses. And sheriff Darleaf, sheriff Darleaf and I from Barry County, Michigan are the presenters, and he's kind enough to be there. That helped put the rubber on the road. He's more practical than I am because what he does he he's a doer. He's a sheriff. He's out there doing things. I am too, but in a different I mean, I'm not worrying about somebody shooting me while I'm doing it as much. Oh, some some. I I worry about getting thrown to jail when I do what I do. And I've had that happen a couple of times.
You know, lawyers that are aggressive and we're on an adversarial tradition, Our common law is not inquisitorial like the rest of the world. It's adversarial. We go into court and we it's a fight. It's all about it was not we used to have, jury or, we used to have trial by battle, and now we have battle by trial. All the rules are almost exactly the same fundamentally anyway. And before the jury, it's battle by trial. And, we do that, but go there and and take those courses. We're getting ready, fix and do, as they say in some places, fixing to, teach a class on the declaration of 76 calls by calls and blow by blow, a common law document. Common law document, the complaint. But to go through it cause by cause and blow by blow is to see the organization of it, number one. But it's also to compare the law of the land, our common law tradition, with the law of the city, the canon civil law tradition of Rome. Because that's what our world was all about.
England was said that our common the common law does not apply on our American plantation. That's a quote from the first volume of Blackstone's commentaries on the common law. You know, all of us or not all of us you know what we can say about a lot of people, man, he's right headed. I'll tell old Blackstone. Bill Blackstone was right headed. He was so right headed that, the the legal profession in England, the barristers rejected him. He was one of them. He wrote those, or he those lectures put to writing and he was appointed judge. That didn't last long because he was overturned so much. And people said he's not a good judge because on appeal, he's overturned. Well, just the opposite was true.
The rest of the legal community refused to to go his way. He was right. But he did say this and here he was wrong. None of us are right all the time. He said, I'm quoting, our common law tradition does not apply in our American plantations. Plantation is a fancy word for colony. Our common law does not apply, and they believed it and then forced it with a vengeance. And that's why we went to war with them. Because if our common law didn't apply, that means we didn't have the right, the the duty to carry a gun. That means we didn't have, the right to resist an unlawful search and seizure. All those are common law doctrines.
That means we didn't have the right silence. That's a common law doctrine. It came to the always in our common law came to the forefront during the Protestant Reformation when the Roman powers and the the, the star chamber and the and the ecclesiastic courts were holding people in contempt, cutting off their noses, their ears, cutting their tongues out. A lot of blood was shed to affirm what had always been true in our common law tradition. These things I'm talking about, and that's what, the emperor of the British empire, king in England, emperor here said. And so we we didn't go after them. They came after us. We didn't go after them. They came after us, and we tried to defend ourselves.
And they finally got to the point that the only defense was offense. It took seven years. We really never attacked them even after seven years of the war. And finally, at the very end, the Cornwallis got cornered, and and they sprung the trap and closed the net. Well, we threw them out, but we did not attack them. We did not attack them. This was not a revolution. Well, at any rate, you can take those classes for appreciation of a donation. You can also get the winterized translation of the bible. A common lawyer translates and annotates from the original tongues. I say that with emphasis because people come back and say, well, what what bible did you translate it from? I translated it from the original tongues. No matter how much I say it, people keep saying that. I didn't translate it from anything.
I've been doing it for over forty years and for what it's worth, I do the target audience is me. If you wanna look at it, you can get it if you wanted. It comes in digital form and it's five volumes because it has over a 135 foot or, 35,000 footnotes. 35 over 35,000 footnotes. Over 200 long appendices longer than footnotes. Tracing major themes through the warp and the wolf of the bible. This is what I do. I've been doing it for a long time. That's pretty much all I do now. I wanna make it available to people if they want it. We're on the radio seven days a week. We have church on Sundays. Same thing on Saturdays. But, we talk about the laws of nature and the laws of nature's God. But if you go to commonlawyer.com commonlawyer.com, you can find all that stuff there. And by the way, support us. I don't practice law as much as I used to. I'm pretty much slowed way down. I just teach, but I teach a lot and I stay busy at that, but I can't do that.
Those that help me can't keep going unless you donate to us. If you don't donate to us, you think we're doing the right thing and you don't donate to us, you're gonna suffer for it. I say this in this way. God will bless you if you do what you believe is right. If you believe and if you don't believe I'm doing the right thing, don't worry about it. No. God moves people to give and I'm not begging. I'm just saying that if I don't tell you that he'll bless you for doing the right thing, well I'm not fulfilling my responsibilities as a teacher of the laws of nature.
That's our common law tradition and the laws of nature is god. That phrase signifies the bible. And the declaration of 76, we'll talk about all that too. Lord willing. Because remember the website, support us and this is Brent, Brent Allen Winters. And I'm here with Roger Sales of Roger Sales Radio Ranch. And Roger, of course, has a website. He doesn't talk about it as much. And a book he's written, by the way, too. I am not good at self promotion. I'm not either. I'm learning, Roger. I'm getting better. It's a pain in the neck. You wanna talk about your subject. That's what I wanna do more than promoting. Is that the way you are? Yeah. Pretty much.
[01:03:34] Unknown:
Well, I wanted to, thank you for that, Brent. I wanted to go back the one experience I've had with someone that said they had removed their property from the property rolls. Uh-huh. We in the Patriot community refer to that as a Lloyd Eel, if I'm gonna Murr. That's close enough. Right? I may I may mispronounce it Murr. Close enough. Title. And so this guy was a student of Al Atasque. Now you remember who he was, right, Brent? No. I'm out of the loop with some of these fellas. Well, he was this was back in the nineties. He's the guy I can tell well, I'm gonna have to tell two stories now. Mhmm.
He was the guy. He was in Texas. He was a roofer and got into all this with a child custody situation. Got to be very interested and very good at it, and he started he was about parallel to me in, Atlanta. He was in Dallas. A lot of people in Texas a lot of people know who he was, but he's still around. He hadn't demise, but he didn't have any profile. And he started a group there in Dallas, and he started a magazine, tabloid, a little magazine called the Anti Scheister. Do you remember that?
[01:04:47] Unknown:
Uh-huh. Go ahead. Yeah.
[01:04:49] Unknown:
Yeah. So Al would write a lot of those articles. He'd take contributing, people and whatnot. Well, this is one of his students. And I actually talked to the guy on the phone, and, he had some property. Somehow, he had achieved this in Oregon. And the way the story is, is that he was going to move Al out there. He was building a cabin on his land. Al was living in Fort Worth or something in what he described as a cat box. And, so the guy said, listen. If you wanna come out here, I'll let you live in the cabin. And, you know, it's not finished. Help me finish it. This, that, and the other. Al took him up on it, moved out there, and, they were just about finished with the cabin.
Al had moved all his stuff in it, and, they installed the hot water heater. And somehow there was a leak, and and the cabin caught fire. Mhmm. Well, they called the fire department, and the road was right next to where the cabin was on his property. And the fire department pulled up there, and they came down and said, well, we can't come on your property. It's not on the property rolls. It's not on the tax rolls. So the cabin burned to the ground. Okay? So what I tell people, should you there's a number not a number. There's a few people that have this as a goal. I understand it. And if you do achieve that, you better, like, once a year stroke a check to the fire department and some of the other things that you would be covered by your property tax payment. And I think that
[01:06:29] Unknown:
again.
[01:06:32] Unknown:
Hello? Could you please hit your mic there? Say hello. Could you please hit your mic, for a second, please? And, what I try and tell people is if you do achieve that once a year or so, you better go strokes, some money to these things like the fire department. So I'll say, listen. I'm I may be off the tax rolls, but if something happens, I want your support. Boom. So it's not a tax like an income tax. It's a tax generally that's mounted by bond issues that have been floated on elections for things that are local, fire departments, schools, etcetera, etcetera. Now I if you're older and you don't have any children of school bearing age, then you ought to be able to take that percentage of whatever your payment is and and put that aside. But it's generally a local oriented tax and not a federal tax. So
[01:07:31] Unknown:
I just don't I don't know if people have proper perspective on it, Brent. That's what I It it it's a state tax. It's not a federal. Land land is in the jurisdiction of the state. Mhmm. And then the feds have no jurisdiction over private land.
[01:07:45] Unknown:
No. That's a good point. Yeah. Well, here's the rub. Now what they're doing now, and it's evidently going on all over the country, is the assessment boards have been well, they did one thing. Instead of taking, like, for the school board, what the schools, were were gonna need for the next year financially, they're going in and going, how much do you need? And they're letting the entities say what the totals are they want. And that has thrown the whole assessment thing totally upside down. They're having a lot of problems with it in different parts of the country, and they're literally, with ad valorem taxes, just pricing the the the whole markets out of themselves.
[01:08:29] Unknown:
Well, I figured they would do that like the military would do. It worse now than ever before. Maybe doing it worse, but they're gonna ask. They're always gonna ask, well, what is it you want? And then they say, oh, we can't give you that much. And then they fight over it, the different entities. You know? I get what you're saying. Well, that that's, that's my thing on, these taxes, though, Roger. And unless I see proof of what you're saying, I'd say that rumors get started. And I say, but this is really true. I don't know that it is. You know? Oh, I I wanna go if you're not familiar with Al Haddish's experience
[01:09:01] Unknown:
there with the, Texas assistant attorney general Mhmm. And that story. I know some of the audience is. Al's kind of a legend, really. Because mainly of this. Mhmm. And so there was a company out there that made colloidal silver, and they had put the company in a trust. And the feds were going after colloidal silver. This is in the nineties. And they didn't come after him directly. They came after him through the state. Mhmm. And they, the assistant attorney general of Texas was personally handling this case. Mhmm. And he'd been handling it. They'd been dancing for five years. And so it was coming to some sort of a head. And at the last minute, the trustee appointed Al Adisk as the trustee, I believe. Mhmm. Mhmm. And so he was enjoined in the case.
And so he went and started reading. First thing he did was went back to the original legislation back to turn the last century. And he went to the original FDA legislation and found in it, it says man and other animals. And he went to the assistant attorney general for the first meeting, and he put that in front of him. He said, I'm not an animal. I'm made in God's image. Mhmm. And they after five years, $500,000, of personally, of a spent by the attorney general assistant attorney general of Texas, they folded their tent and walked away.
[01:10:33] Unknown:
Mhmm.
[01:10:34] Unknown:
Because I'm made in I mean, God's image. I'm not an animal.
[01:10:39] Unknown:
Well, here's the here's the way I'd look at that. Like the old fellow said, I didn't see that. I only heard. But just to be sociable, I'll take your word, and I'm not gonna quarrel with people who give testimony. But at the same time, if I'm gonna act on or promote it, I've got to have proof. And and, given testimony, that becomes popular testimony doesn't move me much just because I've had bad experiences doing that. I've never seen it. I've never seen anybody get all the tax rolls. I've heard all sorts of stories. I've even seen documents floated, you know, but that's why I say Yeah. Yeah. That's why I say, I don't I don't promote the idea because what we're doing in those cases and the other thing is this. We're just chopping around on the branches. And when you get caught up in the minutiae well, no. We need to we need to chop it out by the roots, and that's what Christianity is.
Christianity doesn't even reform the man. God is not out to reform anybody or any country or any government. He's out totally to replace everything. He replaces you to start with. He replaces you with a new man, a new mind, a new everything, and you're gonna get a new body, a new spirit, a new understanding, a new enlightenment. You're hearing things you didn't used to hear. You're seeing things you didn't used to see. You're understanding what you didn't used to understand because you're no longer who you were. You were an outlaw. When God brings you when he pardons you from outlawry, just like outlawry at common law, when you come back in, you come back in as a newborn babe, and everything you had before, all of your land and titles and prestige or whatever it was, offices, you start all over again. That's what outlawry is. That's what pardon is, a common law. When the president of The United States or the governor of your state pardoned somebody for a state crime, you come in as newborn babe. It doesn't it doesn't exonerate you and make you innocent. That's not the point of it at all. It's just saying we're giving you a new birth. The old man is guilty. This is outlawry. It's a picture of Christianity.
The old man is guilty, and we're pardoning the the pardon shoves him aside, leaves him in his guilty grave, and you're born anew. That's Christianity. And that's what he wants us to do with everything. We're not here to reform government. We're not here to reform the system. We're here to replace it with what with God's kingdom, to use the old King James word, his basileia, is, God's, arrangement. God's arrangement of scopes of jurisdiction. And and the hierarchy of how God has arranged authority. And, if you can see that, you're looking at the kingdom of God. You can't see it though unless you're born from above. I'm quoting the Bible. That's what it says, and I think there's truth to that. Well, Roger, not
[01:13:19] Unknown:
anything else you wanna say? No. I think we're we're simpatico,
[01:13:23] Unknown:
though, because I was just thinking why don't we open up the mic and see if any of the students or any listeners have anything to ask or add or discuss that they'd like. Well Larry, do you don't wanna Well, I don't wanna ignore Paul's request. So Paul Paul, you come in here if you can Okay. If I can do that. I mean, maybe I can talk about that in a little bit, and then we can open it up a little bit. But Paul, are you there?
[01:13:48] Unknown:
Yes. Yeah. I'm here. Yeah. Well,
[01:13:51] Unknown:
now you get me started, and I'll address what you wanna address about it. It was about the lord's prayer, wouldn't it? Okay. Yeah. Go ahead.
[01:13:58] Unknown:
I've always felt kind of empty at the end of the Lord's Prayer. I I always felt that, you know, from what I had heard about the the Amun Ra being the god of political, conquest, which, you know, we deal with day in and day out, really. And, it it just never felt right to me. And I did come across that video, and the one thing that struck me was with only 99,000 subscribers, within fourteen days, it had already had nearing a half million views, and that just doesn't happen. So and and I was I listened to it. I'd actually, I watched it a couple of times. And, what struck me was that they did show, Arabic words for they broke down each sentence, and they showed the Arabic, and then they showed an interpretation based on the Arabic.
And I didn't have firsthand knowledge of whether they were actually proven correct with that. And you know the only person that I know that is absolutely, positioned to verify the accuracy of what they said is you. And, I just thought it would be, an interesting thing to go through. And and I I don't get a bad feeling from that video. It, it doesn't strike me as being anything nefarious or anything that, is in compromise to God because it recognizes that God is the breath, God is the divine spark, God is, the creator, we are the creation, we are with God because without God, we are nothing.
And it actually pointed that out. So what are what are your thoughts on it?
[01:16:14] Unknown:
Well, first, thanks for sending it. You watched it twice. I watched it about one and a quarter. I went clear through it this morning or didn't go through it. I just listened to it. And, I assume you're asking because you think that I'll be candid and candid and straightforward. Yes. And, so I'm gonna do that. What that man said was exceedingly dangerous for one reason if no other reason at all. He's adding to the word of God. You know, you can add good things to the word of the sounds. Things that sound good it's still adding to the word of God. And there's not one sliver of evidence that that there's anything missing from the Lord's prayer and in the evidence of history.
And what we when we go to the manuscript evidence, and I looked again, I went back and looked. You know what? We can go to the manuscript evidence now on the Internet. I used to have to go to a library. It's hard to find one if I was back in the Midwest. I used to drive up to Winona Lake, Indiana. There was one library there that had everything that pertain to such things, and I could pull down portfolios of photographs, high resolution photographs off of the shelves and look at them as some of the major manuscripts. Well now I can go to the internet and do that and the resolution is even better.
But I can do that. It's amazing of course. I can look up summaries of it too. Now when it comes to the Lord's prayer, especially chapter the one there's two of them in the Bible. They're not the same. One's in Luke and one's in the sixth chapter of Matthew. That's the the popular one that people know, unquote. There's not any variations in the manuscripts that are avail that are that are known. And God has promised to preserve his word to us and, if what this fellow is saying is true somebody hid it from me. Of course he blamed the Roman church. You know it's easy to go back and this is popular among conservative groups, but it it's not true. Go back and blame Constantine for everything. The Seventh day Adventists blame him for making worship on Sunday. That's not true. Did he want it on Sunday? Well, he did it on Sunday. Does he, he's, is he the one that did it? No, he's not the one that did it. But boy, the people make that popular. It's all over the internet. And so you got these people trying to go back. They call it the Hebrew roots movement. Listen, if there's any the Hebrew roots movement is not Hebrew roots. That's Judaism.
You want to go back and be like a Babylonian Jew? Well, I'd I'd I wouldn't suggest it. I used to teach Hebrew, publicly, Terre Haute, Indiana, West Terre Haute specifically, but people all over it. I get these people I was on the radio then, so I had people come. I had a lot of people come. People would come, and they'd been to Jerusalem, the Wailing Wall, and they've got their prayer shawls. And then they'd do all this Judaism stuff. And I tried to be nice to them and not bust their bubble and say, look, look, Judaism is not what God ordained. You you can't that's not that's wrong. Why are you doing all these things? These things aren't in the Bible. They're certainly not in the law of God. And if they're not in the law of God, does Jesus Christ anywhere affirm them? No.
He denies them. All of them. Does Paul the Apostle affirm any of the practices of Judaism? No. He and he knew him better than anybody. I'm talking about the ugly stuff. And he he he denied it all. You know Paul the Apostle is kind of funny John the same way. Those guys knew Judaism. They lived in Jewry. They grew up in it. They knew what it was. But no place in the New Testament do any of them forthrightly get how can I say this, they don't even want to talk about it? And Paul the Apostle got one word for it, and he uses a word in the Greek that means, it's a in English, the only way you could translate it with any equivalence would be that four letter word that starts with s and ends in a t. The King James translates it dung, d u n g.
But it means human sewage is what it means. That's what he said Paul the apostle said it is. He knew it very very well. He didn't talk about it, but when you look at his writings and all of the writings of the New Testament, every doctrinal complaint they have is against some element of Babylonian Judaism. So to go back and look at that and and try to emulate it is what is called Judaization. The bible calls it that. It's the very thing that the bible says don't do. I've been to churches where people go and I don't know, they try oh, how let me back up. I'll get too far afield from the Lord's prayer. The Lord's prayer is the Lord's prayer. There's not one sliver of evidence that it's not all there. There's nothing in history. This thing that this fight fellow cites, the the Didache or the Didache. Again, I don't know how they pronounce it. I don't care to. I'll just do the best I can so you know what I'm talking about.
Most people that, are pathologists, put this at the end of the first century, the Didache. Didache. At the end of the first century, it's a very early document, at the beginning of the second. And they say that this fellow was saying, that Paul, you remember, that in that document there's something that's attached on the end of the Lord's Prayer. And then he cites also a false document called the gospel of Thomas. That's a false document. That's a fraud. And besides that, it has no the badges no badges of of being a part of being canonical, as we say, part of the Bible. But isn't it funny? People jump up and say, I found something in history that the church has ignored for 17 centuries, and it changes everything.
And they get 500,000 hits. Why? Sensationalism. That's like the shroud Shroud of Turin. It it's sensational. The he the mysterious numbers of the whatever they call it, the numerology books, it's sensational. It's the distant beat. But to be drawn to that, again, is to be drawn away from the evidence. All of life is based upon evidence and you won't live long if you don't pay attention to it. And every page and every phrase and every word of the Bible shouts about evidence. Jesus Christ talks, he talks about evidence. How often does he say, well, in the mouth of two or three witnesses, I testify, the spirit testifies, you testify, the three witnesses, that closes the case, let's move on.
I mean he didn't say it just that way but evidence is what life is all about and false doctrine is not paying attention to the evidence. Okay let's go to the manuscripts of the Bible. We our Bible is in and of itself evidence. It is the evidence of what happened and what God said, and it's the best evidence we got. It falls under the best evidence rule at common law, meets all the criteria, and the and the ancient document rule as well. When we're trying to see what the manuscripts of the Bible say, what the variations are, we look at the reliable evidence under the ancient document rule, which the the Bible talks about that. Our common law tradition has a well developed body of law with the ancient document rule and the best evidence rule. It's part of our law of evidence at common law. We use it in the federal courts, in our state courts, it's all over. And it's reliable, proven through centuries.
And the Bible undergirds all that. But the bible itself, it can be put to the test of that best evidence rule and the ancient document rule. And when we go to the fourth chapter of the book of Deuteronomy right there in the beginning of the books of Moses, it says do not add to and do not take away from God's word. Jesus Christ affirmed Deuteronomy, quoted Deuteronomy more than any other book. And Jesus Christ said not one jot nor one tittle shall fall away or be ignored of this law. It's a fascinating word in and of itself. Not one until all be fulfilled or as long as. He doesn't say it'll ever fall away, but he said for sure until it's all fulfilled, it's gonna stay.
And we're not to add or to or take away from. The last book of the Bible says it over again, repeating Deuteronomy, do not add two, do not take away, not one jot, that's the smallest of the 22 Hebrew letters, not one tittle. That's a serif on one of the Hebrew letters that turns, for example, a reish to a dalef. You change a letter, you've changed a word. You change a word, you change a sentence. You change the sentence, change the whole doctrine. And Jesus Christ said, we don't tolerate any of that. The Masoretes beginning back couple of centuries before the immaculate birth of Jesus Christ, not the conception of Mary, that's another unbiblical doctrine added to the Bible. You know, you add tradition to the Bible, you're adding to the Bible. You add another book to the Bible, the Talmud, the Mission of the Book of Mormon, the Watchtower of the Jehovah Witnesses, take the Science and Keys in the Scriptures, the Mary Baker Eddy, Christian Science. You add books.
Friends, that's simple. You're adding to the Bible. And when you add to the Bible, you're watering it down, and you're taking away because when you add to it with inevitably, what what happens? Well, people will pay more attention to what's added than they will the Bible. You add tradition to the Bible as Rome does and Lutheran church does, the Greek Orthodox church. The as a practical matter, it's on an equal level whether they say it is or not. It is. And but when you put it on an official equal level, the Bible has a way of receding from consideration in all those cases. Ain't that true? Of course, it is. People know about the traditions of Rome. They take the mass, holy unction, all the stuff they do. Bible doesn't mean anything. I interviewed a Roman priest once one time, nice fella.
He wanted to come on. His buddy buddy said, I want you to go talk to Brent. He's on the radio and morning show. The guy calls me and I knew where he lived. I knew where the Roman church was. And he said, well, if I come real nice fella. He said, if I come, just I want you to understand I don't know anything about the Bible. Now this is a Roman priest. After a dozen years of higher education admission. Yeah. And I appreciated him saying that. Hey, honest guy's honest. He didn't know squat about the Bible. Why? Well, because the traditions of his church, the Bible recedes from consideration in their education. What is number one in their education?
Logic. Thomas Aquinas, official doctrine of the church. Well, logic is like the the law sharp in tenth chapter of Luke. He wasn't asking the right question. And Thomas Aquinas, you gotta have start with the right fact and they don't do that. They, they get that wrong because they're wrong headed to start with because their doctrines are wrong. It's law of the city. If you're in that world, the Bible recedes from consideration. The Bible is the final arbiter. God's heaven and earth, the the final arbiter of right and wrong in the sky and on the land. The Bible is final. And you, my friend, individually, without anybody else, will have to come to your own conclusions about it.
I can of course, the Bible says that God has given teachers to his people. If I'm here teaching and you think I know something, I may coach you one way or the other, but you're gonna have to make the decision, not me. And I'm not here to make it for you at all. I can't do that. Not my not my office, not my business. My business is to bear testimony to what I know for sure. After I can say this. Yeah. After forty five years of intense Bible translation, after forty five years, I tell you what I think I've discovered. If I don't know and I think I still don't understand, it's my duty to say I'm speculating at this point.
[01:28:16] Unknown:
But I don't know. Kind interrupt just a second. There was some kind of major, discovery historically. Our, I think over there in Israel here last week, I didn't get the story. I just saw someone refer to the headline. Mhmm. But you may wanna look around in that area.
[01:28:35] Unknown:
Well, thank you, Roger. No. I keep up with those things because I do have unanswered questions. If someone wants to talk go ahead.
[01:28:43] Unknown:
Oh, so Brian, why do the, the newer translations drop the end of the Lord's prayer, the doxy, the kingdom, the power, and the glory for it?
[01:28:57] Unknown:
Oh, well, and, of course, I don't know the answer to that. I haven't talked to them. But the the evidence that we have the evidence we have of what the lord's prayer is is in the manuscripts. And there are manuscripts, that means written by hand, manu. That's the old word for handwritten before the printing press. Then some of those go back right to the first century almost. We have a fragment of the gospel of John that goes back that far. We have others in the second, third, or third and fourth centuries, and then on up through to the printing press. And, about 6,000 of them, by the way. Almost 6,000 for the New Testament alone.
And, we have an overwhelming, veritable embarrassment of riches and evidence, and the evidence is incontrovertible, undeniable of what the Bible says. Are there variations? Yes, there are. But on in the Lord's but there's no variation that changes anything. And I get that from scholars that say they hate the Bible. Bart Ehrman from Chapel Hill, North Carolina teaches New Testament language and literature. And he he said, well, there's not any very and he knows. He studied under under Medscare at Princeton. In the twentieth century, he was the man that was held up as the fellow that probably knew more than anybody. He's gone now. But Bart Ehrman was his PhD student. And Bart Bart hates the Bible, but he says there's not any variation in the New Testament that changes any Christian doctrine. Well, I I I think I could say it stronger than that. And I again just say that having having worked in the New Testament for forty five years intensely. And I come to these little variations, maybe a misspelling of a word. That doesn't make any difference, obviously.
The addition of a particle that stresses, emotion, and there's some of those in the in the you know, it's funny people say, if you learn one if you learn how to use the Greek article and rec can recognize the Greek definite article, like, we have the, that's a definite article, you've learned one seventh of the New Testament words. Well that's probably it doesn't mean much, but that's probably true. But I do know Dan Wallace. I don't know Dan Wallace. I know that Dan Wallace did his PhD on the Greek article. It was that it's that important. And And it does mean a lot. You can't always you can't translate it into English every time and make smooth translation. Although I found I think I found a way to do that. I don't make it smooth, but I can make it readable. I don't wanna leave it out. When I look at the English, the winterized version, I look at the English translation.
I wanna know what the Greek is. So I find a way to get it in there, and I know how I do that. So there it is. Every word must tell, and it's important when you translate, I believe. I think it's only, yeah, it's the only way it can be. You're not supposed to every jot and every tittle is important. I when I translate, I must make sure that every word tells and that the force of every word is felt in the translation somewhere, somehow. We can't go much further than that until we try to do that. You say, why was it left off in the modern translations? I I don't know what they did. I I didn't know King James has it. The New American Standard has it. Geneva Bible has it. I can't keep up with all the translations that are out there trying to make money. And I I don't know what's left out of, but I do know this.
To say that there's something beyond, for thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory forever, there's no evidence for that, that the Didache case mentions those kind of things. But we all and and that doesn't mean it's not biblical, what the Didache says. A first early century document, which clearly is a a document that is before Rome. Rome didn't really rise to glory and power really until the eleventh century. That's when it really came on like gangbusters. Before that it was there, it was very strong, and its doctrines had gone awry. That's all true.
But Constantine wasn't the one that made that happen. He was the one that welded it to the government and the the complete fusion that means that the the church Christianity was there in his mind to support and undergird his power. That's true. That did happen. But to say that Constantine decided what books would be in the bible and all that, there's not a a sliver of evidence of that either. Of all the count the councils that he convened, nothing is there that says that. There are things there that say that these are the that says, well, here, we recognize these are the books of the Bible that are being used in all of the churches.
We have we have record of that, but nowhere do we have record of, okay, we're gonna throw this one out and put this one in. We don't like this one and we like this. No. That didn't exist. That didn't happen. There is recognition recognition of the books of the Bible that are being used in all the churches, the consensus throughout Christendom that really happened. Well I've I now I've gotten gotten far afield maybe the Lord's prayer, but a lot of things I can say by the way that guy Paul, that thing you sent me, that fellow that did that talking, he's slick. Made me think of this of the serpent in the garden himself, had a beautiful smooth voice playing that nice music behind. He said a lot of things that were true, and you mentioned some of them some of them yourself.
And even the things he said that he added were true, but then he'd say things like this, and he'd say it quickly and in passing. He'd say, you are divine. Now wait a minute. What do you mean by that? I'm divine? No. No. No. God is God. He is creator. I am a creature of his creation. There's and you made that point Paul. You know, you absolutely said that's true, but this fella when he was talking, he would slip little things in like that. Well, you're gonna add to the Bible without evidence. There's something wrong with you. That's that's the scary thing. And then he cited the gospel of Thomas as though it were true. It's not. It's it's a fraud.
And there is is no evidence, no badges of good evidence that it is true. Well, that's Paul, did you have something you wanted to add to that?
[01:35:09] Unknown:
No. And I did pick those out too. I did pick those out too. It did it did have, like, little little, nuances of, a Christ, consciousness and all that. It it kind of almost tried to to balance on that bleeding edge between Yeah. Religion and new age philosophy.
[01:35:37] Unknown:
You could feel it then. Okay. I feel better about you, Paul. I was afraid. Yeah. And I felt that too. Okay. We're on the same page. And the other thing that he said was that, shucks. I forgot. There were so many things. I didn't write them down. But, yeah, there were a lot of he slipped a lot of stuff in there like the snake did in the garden. He slipped a lot of stuff in there. Go ahead, Paul. Well, Paul, unless you have something else to say, I I do wanna give people time to and and Roger did, to talk. Roger,
[01:36:06] Unknown:
KTM is over there. Yeah. I'm here, and I I know some of the audiences. You you you you do with them what you and I do is you you say something, and it
[01:36:16] Unknown:
spurns something in their brain. Yeah. Well, I'm that way too. Yeah. That's why this is enjoyable. It wouldn't be otherwise.
[01:36:24] Unknown:
Yeah. And profitable, I hope. Go ahead. Well, I'm just gonna say anybody in the audience wants a good question for Brent, me, Paul, whatever comment, line of, of ex explanation you'd like us to explore, Star 6, and the floor is yours. Hey, Roger. Be so there's Larry again. I was gonna say, Lou may not be so curious after all. Go ahead, Larry. Larry's always got questions. Do you did you get the other two answer?
[01:36:57] Unknown:
Oh, yeah. I did.
[01:36:58] Unknown:
Okay. So the, Brent, when when you're a boy, did your parents and, like, did the people that lived in in your county, did they pay property taxes? And it almost sounds like what you're saying is there's nothing real we can really do about having to pay property taxes. It's just a it's just a fact of life unless, like, in in in my case, living in in in Florida, unless there's a constitutional amendment that's at it with a 60% vote by the people to get rid of homes and all they're trying to do is get rid of homestead property tax. All the businesses and Airbnbs and and commercial properties, they all still have to pay taxes.
It's just the homestead, properties, which only make up for, like, around, I don't know, 30 per 30% of all property taxes paid. DeSantis is just trying to get rid of those property taxes because he doesn't believe you should have to be paying rent to the government. In other words, they could just come in if you fail to pay your your property tax that they could put a lien against your property. And then if you get into default, they could just come in and and seize your property. And he doesn't think that's right. And he uses the analogy that if you go buy a TV or a car, you pay a one time tax. You're not paying, like, a yearly tax to own that TV or car.
And, he says and this is your home we're talking about. So that that's what's given him this, this persistence to get rid of this this homestead property tax. But when you're a kid, was there property taxes, and where did this all originate from?
[01:38:51] Unknown:
Well, thank you. That's exactly what I wanna say. I'm what I wanna answer that question. Property taxes in our English speaking world originated way back in a way that's obvious to us now after the Norman invasion of ten sixty six. William the Red, Rufus, the conqueror they called him, the son of a bastard, no, the bastard son of a king, and he was. But that doesn't mean he's not God's man. God didn't use him. He did, but he did a lot of evil things, very much evil things. He immediately organized the whole country of England. He conquered it. So it was, he said, it's all mine. Battle of Hastings, fourteen October ten sixty six. And he divided the country up in about 200 parts to 200 and gave that land, each of those parts to, to about 200 of his chief officers that came over with him.
And he said to each of them, I don't care how you do it. I'll make suggestions to you, but according to how much land you got, you've got to provide x number of knights, k n I g h t s. That's a fighting man mounted on horseback, fully trained and equipped for forty days each year, depending upon how much land you have. So then he went about not long after that. And he did the doomsday book, which was a survey of all private property in England. I mean, right down to the last chicken and hog. And by the way, the doomsday book are called the doms, the dom book. Yeah. That's an ancient concept. And the word doom back then is Anglo Saxon word.
And even Alfred in the August had a Dom book or doom. We say doom today, but then it was one O Dom. And what it meant was judgment day. It didn't, and that doesn't, and that doesn't mean negative judgment. It could be be, it doesn't mean a curse. It could be a blessing of judgment. Depends upon whether the verdict is in your favor. It's just a general catchall word to them for judgment. What the courts do, the courts are places of doom, judgment, and they call it the doomsday book. And, every chicken and every, fence post is, is listed in there in the whole blasted kingdom. Why? So he'd know how much each man owed him in tax and dependent upon the worth of that property And those and that was for national defense.
That was a tax. There was no money to speak of. It was a moneyless country in those days, and wealth was in the fee, f e e. And that's the Anglo Saxon word for cattle.
[01:41:37] Unknown:
And this is let me interrupt. This is where that word estate comes in. This guy has an estate because it's not his land. The king gave it to him, and he owes duty.
[01:41:48] Unknown:
That's a good point, Roger. And that word estate, if you have an airport, is a French word. And William and his invaders were norm from Norway. But they had settled, been settled on the coast of France for about a hundred and sixty years, and they'd picked up a bastardized form of the French tongue. And when they invaded, they brought that French tongue with them. And from that time, October until the mid thirteen hundreds, the only tongue spoke in the courts and in the parliament. They could see par parliament's a French word, parley, a place where you have parley. Before the invasion, it was called the witengamot.
The witengamot, the meeting of the gray bearded men. Well, now it's parliament. Everything was in French. If you were an Anglo Saxon, there were only about 6,000 Normans in the country and about, 800,000 Anglo Saxons. Normans ran the place. If you didn't speak their tongue, you couldn't even get into a court. See? So they were kind of shut out and they didn't have a policy of extermination. You think extermination is bad in Israel right now. It's bad. They didn't hold a candle about the Normans tried to do to the Anglo Saxons and the Celts. It was extermination time and they went after him. Well, it stands, stands a reason. And, and also they got what was coming to them. That's what I say. That's the way God works. The Anglo Saxons did the same thing to the Celts when they got there. They tried to exterminate them. But the Celts got what they deserved because when they got there, they tried to exterminate the Iberians.
It just goes round and round and round, the evil empires. Men are wicked, dirty, rotten, low down, scummy devils about things like that. And every race of man thinks he is the only one that's greater than all the rest. The Japs thought it. No. They believed it. It's part of their religion. The Germans were whipped up to it. It's part of their religion too. And maybe let's say it's true. Don't ever say it and don't act like it. God won't allow it. Even if you think your race is right or true or greater or have better genetics, there's no sense saying it, friends, because God won't stand for that. It'll it'll work into arrogance and it will draw people that are dangerous. And there may, as I can say, if you wanna believe it, I, and maybe act on it yourself, but just be careful.
The history of mankind is replete with what happened to people that do that. I can't change that. Just an observation from history, but that that's how the tax has started. It was every man owed and to, and to, if the King defended, we took that money or not that money that night and defended his kingdom, he would defend in your little parcel of land. And if you defend your little parcel parcel of land, you're defending help defend the kingdom. And then that those 200 officers, each divided their land into parts and they told the people they parceled it out to, you can make all the money you want, farm, raise cattle, whatever. You just owe me this much contribution in the, under the night's fee. And it got down to small parcels of land, about five acres, where a man, all he owed every year was production of a brass helmet or production of a sword.
Or one fella I read about if if they ever went if the army of ever went to the continent of, Europe to France to defend, William's holdings there, the, his only job was to, hold, not make, not provide, but to hold, one of the Knight's helmets as he rode along for battle, then help him get it on. And that was his contribution to national defense. That's how land taxes became to their own here. And so every man in England who owned a parcel of land, whether it be five acres on up, the baleen, the baleen, who was, well, that was the lowest, freehold for the baleen. He, he held five acres.
And so there was always an upward look to provide national defense. Well, by the sixteen hundreds, money had come into England, the gold and silver through Elizabeth, really, and few others, but, sir Francis, Drake, who was that other one that she was sweet on? She was always, she was always playing the men to get them to do all she wanted. Walter Raleigh? Yes, sir Walter Raleigh. They were plunderers of the Spanish shipments of gold and silver from South America. And they'd bring that stuff in England. And then the, the crown of Spain would say, Elizabeth, you've got to stop these men. And she'd say, Hey, I'm just a woman. I can't, I can't do nothing with these guys. They're private plunderers. I, they're not, they're not part of the government of England. She's always playing the woman card. I'm just a woman, you know, that kind of thing. And she was sweet on Drake and a fascinating story ended up chopping one of their heads off. Maybe both of them. I don't remember, but there was money in England. So the, at that point when gold and silver became, pretty plentiful in England, then the law changed and you can provide money instead of a night. It was called the night's fee, F E E, the night's fee, pay payment. Well, you can provide money and not have to provide a night. And then taxes of money were born out of land at that point. We get to America. Okay, here we are in America.
We got to pay, we got to pay, or the people paid, and it was sold to the American people. This was much, much later, not with the Puritans. That was all national defense with them too. But then later, the whole land tax thing was sold in each state that we're going to give free education to everybody. That's how it was sold. Knowing knowing, of course, that would put government in control of education. And that would be an education to support your government, whatever their policies were. And that's what happened. And it but it's easy to justify it when a in a country wherever Burton or everybody owns a little land. And there was a time when that was true. Was that about in the middle of the 1800s later? Yeah. Yeah. But let me this slow catching on. By the time my grandpa became a school teacher in the little country schools around here, I was reaching he left me his desk. It was a big wooden desk, and my granddad was a farmer. He farmed in the summertime, taught school in the winter.
And and, and was in the bull business too, by the way. He hauled bulls or or leased bulls to people back before artificial insemination, him and my dad. Well, I found a paper he had written when he was in school. It was handwritten. There were no typewriters. It was in the early twenties. Oh, there were typewriters, but he couldn't afford one, so handwritten. It was written online paper. I found it in the back of the top drawer. I didn't know it was there. The question he was trying to answer is, will the government Here's the question. Will the government be able to support public education?
Will the government be able will will the government be able to should the government be given the task of successfully educating American children? So in the 1920s, that was a question that people were asking and they weren't sure it was true. By the time you get to the thirties and forties, they were fully convinced it was true, and the government had moved in and were brainwashing the children. They didn't people didn't know it yet. When I went to school in the late fifties, early sixties, and parents believed that the government was good at educating children. Yep. And America was good and the communists were bad and it was in full force, but immediately, once it became fully accepted, it started to get real ugly and go downhill. And they started teaching or even when I was in school, they tried were just starting to try to have a small segment in PE class in high school on sex education.
That's how that started. And then and then it didn't take but about another ten, twenty years, and the homeschool well, ten years. The homeschooling movement was going like gangbusters. In thirty years, it was going full force. It's growing now even bigger. People want their children out of public education. There's no justification for land taxes because of that. It's time they were stopped. DeSantis is right. But us beating around with a bunch of bunch of, administrative rules isn't gonna change anything. That's my answer. DeSantis has the right idea, but, and I'm glad that everybody's fighting it on the individual level because that's an indication of a rising tide of, hey, wait a minute. Why are we doing this to teach our children to be communist? And that is what they're teaching your children, to be transvestites, to accept homosexuality, to be homosexuals, and to be communist.
No question. And to pee in litter boxes now. That's what's that? And to pee in litter boxes. Yeah. And but hey, listen. I had a buddy that he was he was, he retired and he said, I'll go substitute teach. He went to the local high school and substitute teach, and it was in a bigger town, not where I'm from. And they he had a he was supposed to be babysitting these children that were hard to get along with. And he had this one girl in the class who thought she was a pussycat. And she'd come to school dressed in a pussycat outfit. And she'd be all have all and and that he and the school, he told me this, had to provide a litter bark, a litter box for her to pee in and do anything else she needed to do. And she sat at her desk and she'd curl up in the corner like a pussycat. And he had to recognize that she was. That's the madness, friends. Let's get out of this. Let's cut. There's no reason for land taxes. The excuse was public education, and that's not even true now. They use it for everything else, anything they wanna use it for. I'm sure they probably double set of books with along with that, there's a double set of books. Yeah.
[01:51:38] Unknown:
DeSantis better be careful. He's gonna price Florida out of Florida's reach. Yeah. Maybe With all the other things that are happening with this with this communist in New York, everything moving south, man, the real estate agents are the ones that are cleaning up here. Yeah. The the the rents have gone from 1,500 to 4,500 a month, Brent, over the last five years. Yeah.
[01:52:07] Unknown:
You know, the idea that William had, William the conqueror, is pretty pretty good. I mean, he was he was smart the way he organized his national defense and everybody contributed. And that's the militia. That's what that is. Yeah. That was a nice way, a really nice way, and a fair way to establish the militiamen. And the militia is part of our of our it's not an option. It's part of our common law tradition, part of our constitution, the way it's set up. Go ahead, Roger. A lot of people are calling for, Trump to institute the militias.
[01:52:37] Unknown:
Stewart Rhodes, notably. By the way, Stewart Rhodes is reforming Oath Keepers. And, he's a sharp cut. Stuart Rhodes is. Graduated Yale Law School, but he started working for Ron Paul. Was one of Ron Paul's, main people. And, then, of course, he got locked up in the Jan six. He's out. He's one of the most level headed, calm people that I've seen in a while. He just doesn't get excited about any of that stuff. You know? He, matter of fact, addresses it. But that's he's calling he's called they're calling on Trump to do that right now. Stewart's been, he's felt the force of the government,
[01:53:21] Unknown:
as I have, prison. Throw ye in, throw ye out, throw ye in, throw ye out. And that it makes you a more calculated warrior. Put it that way. Uh-huh. A lot more calculated. And then you see what's important.
[01:53:34] Unknown:
And then that's Those are the ones that are serious too. A little more. They're somber and calculated, goal oriented, and driven.
[01:53:43] Unknown:
Boy, I I agree. And so, God can't use anybody until he beats what's worthless out of them. And he will do it. He will do it, and it will be unpleasant. And then he he chastened every chastens every son he receives, and do not despise it, says in Hebrews.
[01:54:01] Unknown:
Well, I but let me stop. And if there's somebody else who wants to comment, Roger, I I've got it. I'm just gonna say is as the country's built up and cities have built up and civilizations built up as it was, by the people that control the money, you know, and they're able to make money, all these efforts, well, they just incorporated in the municipality or whatever the entity is. Well, we've got a school referendum, and it's in the next election, or we gotta bond that referendum for a new civic center or whatever else. They put that in the election, and the city votes on it. So that's where the tax comes from. Who is, the somebody saying That would be me.
[01:54:42] Unknown:
Okay. I've got I've got one thing. Please. As Brent, I don't know if you know this or not, but we, the Radio Ranch Trust Group met for the first time on Wednesday. And, we went through the, through the first lesson. And one of the things that sheriff Darr said, and and I realized that you can't speak for him, and I realized that that trust course was put in the can a few years ago. But people noticed when Sheriff Darr was talking about sovereign citizen and how he runs into those. And their question is, is, what if, any change has been made in his, in his take on, the national as opposed to sovereign citizen?
Does has he is he aware that there are two political statuses, the law of the city, the law of the land, law of nature, nature's god? I don't think he runs into that, like, on a day to day basis, but I do know that we have people in Barre County, Michigan that have actually sent him notice I understand. Yeah. Of their national status. And I realize you can't speak for him. Maybe we can get him on the show sometime to talk about it. I don't know. I think there was a question in there somewhere.
[01:56:11] Unknown:
Was there somebody else that was I thought there was Paul and somebody else who was trying to ask him. I stepped right on you. So I'm sorry. You come was who are you? You were not. It was Paul. Oh, hell. Yeah. Hey, Rogers. Alright. Well, there's Wayne. Hey, Wayne. How are you doing, my friend?
[01:56:31] Unknown:
Pretty pretty good. I know time's sharp. I just had a real quick question for Brent. If he needs to answer Paul's question first.
[01:56:40] Unknown:
Oh, well, I'll just quickly say we ought to bring sheriff Darragh on. And, sheriff Darragh been sheriff over twenty years, and he he's run into a lot of that. He even in his small county. And by by the way, Michigan's a hotbed for that kind of stuff. Yes. It is. A long time. So, yeah, he understands it. He's like any magistrate in government. He recognizes, I think, from what I understand about him, He recognizes the things you're talking about. He is a avid student of the common law, has been for over twenty years, and that's why he's able to get on with me and give such good examples, and he's boots on the ground. I'll try to get him on. Maybe that's that's a good idea. That'd be a great we'd love to have him on for even an hour. You know? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Somebody else had something. Wayne?
[01:57:32] Unknown:
Yeah. Thanks, Roger. Brent had a quick question, and this has to do with our presidential executive orders. And what's rolling around and what's really questioning, in the minds of a lot of folks is, pre, propositioned some executive orders, and you have federal judges stepping on them, almost all across the country. And here you have a duly elected president, you know, doing these orders, but you have only appointed judge, you know, stopping the whole process. And this morning I was reading, in Illinois, there's a federal judge up there that is petitioning to have, over 600, illegal aliens released, okay, that were picked up by d a by ICE. And these were, in some cases, criminals convicted in a court of law.
Do you do you need to sign off?
[01:58:20] Unknown:
No. Keep going. We'll just see if you can get an answer to where it stretches as far as you can, Wayne.
[01:58:26] Unknown:
Okay. Just that, again, these federal judges are stepping on some of the activities that, you know, ICE is, constitutionally, created, agency. These criminals have been convicted, but then the judge comes in and stops the whole process. And I was kinda wondering what's the legal principle involved here in, allowing the judges to do this.
[01:58:47] Unknown:
The legal principle involved is separation of powers. We in America, we want the branches of government to disagree with one another. And just because a judge says, well, no. Here's what we're gonna do. Well, he he still depends. The judge still depends upon president Trump ordering it done. And he may or he may not. And the US marshals that are involved will have to make a a decision. Am I gonna do I work for the president of The United States or do I work for the court? And the truth is they're assigned to both in many cases, but they've got to make a choice too. That's our common law government. Our common law government is a perpetual, never ending Mexican standoff, a three way Mexican standoff between the three separate but co equal branches of government.
And those in the law of the city, which includes almost every other country in the world, can't figure out how we have a country. How do you have a country where the government doesn't control that kind of thing? Where there isn't a final word? The only final word we have in America is the jury. That's final. Dogmatically, no answers owed from anybody on the jury why they did what they did. That's what we have as finality, and that's all we have down here on land is finality. Of course, the maker of heaven and earth is final in his decisions. He's the god of war and the god of everything else, the god of love.
And the the rest of the world can't understand that either. Islam does not understand a god of war being a god of love. They don't have that. We do Because our our god is the maker of all things, seen and unseen. And he decides what happens, and he'll make it happen. And once he decides, and we have no control over that. But the jury does have the responsibility, delegate it from god, to be that final arbiter. But see, DJ Trump, the president, and the federal courts are are fighting with one another, and they depend on each other as does the congress, the legislative branch.
Again, the stress. It's a three way Mexican standoff, and we did this when we taught one of our courses when sheriff Darr and I. We played the final scene of the movie, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly with that three way Mexican standoff, that gun battle. Remember that? Vaguely. Yeah. Yeah. And that's what that's what our government is. And the idea is James Madison says in the Federalist Federalist Papers is as long as government's fighting with each other, as long as there's conflict in government, as long as the greed and the ambition of men and those three branches of government is at odds with each other, they'll leave us alone. That's the idea of common law government. Yeah.
[02:01:20] Unknown:
Brent, I would think that, you know, what's in the best interest of the of the American public? You know, the public interest that is, you know, spending hundreds of billions of dollars to feed and clothe and, medicate, you know, illegal aliens, and then you also have convicted, criminals being put back on the streets. So I would think the public interest would be the overriding factor
[02:01:40] Unknown:
between the two, branches. The over the overriding factor is three separate and coequal branches of government. We don't wanna give that up for nothing. And the more they're fighting I like it's good that they're doing this. But you're not gonna have people in government that are good, ever. There's no such thing as a good man. And where do you find that in the Bible? The Bible says there is none righteous, no, not one. There is they have all gone out of the way. The poison of asps is under their lips, Paul the Apostle speaking. Their throat is an open sepulcher full of dead men's bones.
That's us. Our righteousness is as filthy rags. I tell people, I don't trust, clients. Can't you come to me? And I'd say, let's start out with this. I don't trust you, and if you're dumb enough to trust me, I have a lot lower opinion of you. Let's start out with let's start out with, I don't trust you, you don't trust me, but let's both trust God that God will use both of us for the benefit of the other. Let's help each other. And let's trust God to impel us to that. But to think that there's gonna be somebody oh, well, I'm I'm glad you do. And I like I said, I'm not preaching at you. You're the guy that raised the question. That gives us an opportunity to air the answer, but not at the guy that asked the question. You know, some people ask hypothetical questions because they're asking for somebody else, or they just wanna be part of the discussion. So, no, I'm not, I'm not throwing that at you. But to make the point, and we don't wanna forget this. This is fundamental to who we are as a people. James Madison understood this. James Madison was a the student of John Witherspoon, the only, he was the only clergyman, that signed.
About 25 Bible school graduates signed the declaration of '76, but he was the only clergyman. He was shipped in from Scotland. He was a hardcore bible believing Calvinist presbyterian. And he and James Madison was his closest student. James Madison understood understood the depravity of the human heart. He knows it's in the Bible. He understands that we are hopeless without Jesus Christ, utterly hopeless. Nothing in my hand I bring, only to thy cross I cling. Other refuge have I none hangs my hopeless soul on thee? That's it. That's that's where God will get a man. And once he gets them there, then he can use him. But you gotta under we not you. We must keep in our forefront of our minds that God doesn't need us.
He just takes us and uses us. He could use anything he wanted. As, Rutherford said, and when he in that book, Lex Rex Lex Rex, back that the Scotsman, Rutherford, he said, God can use any agency of his creation to get done what he wants to get done. He can use the clouds and the skies, the atmosphere, animals, men, whatever. He's gonna get done what he wants to get done. Now that's the reformed position, what people used to call Calvinism. God is absolutely, utterly sovereign. And if God is absolutely, utterly sovereign, he has delegated no sovereignty to anybody else. That's why the sovereign movement is wrong with sovereign man and all no, no, no, no, no, no, no. We worship the maker of heaven and earth, the God in the skies that we cannot see. We do not worship and fall down before any similitude, any place, Mecca.
No, no cathedral, no, no idol, no icon, no, no, no man who was set up on a pedestal like a priest or a pope. No, no, no, no, no. That's denial of God. That ticks God off. Him and him alone is the object of our worship. We fall down and worship him in our hearts, and by doing so, he can use us to great benefit of ourselves and others and by his in his glory and our enjoyment. We get the enjoyment, he gets the glory. Well, thanks for bringing that up, though. But this separate coequal branch of government, if you go to the Bible, you see that God will not tolerate any man ever gathering the three powers of government into a single will.
Saul tried it. Saul, king of Israel, the kingship, as the prophet said, was ripped from him because he did that. And Adolf Hitler did it. He accepted it. He met a nice guy, smart guy, did a lot of good things. That's the one thing God will not accept under any circumstances. Why? Because it is an attempt to usurp the position of the Messiah of God. Jesus Christ himself has authority to gather all three branches of government, the powers of them, into a single set of hands, and that's his, and he will do that. But no other member of Adam's race has that right. And by the way, anybody who tries it is the very definition of that word that the apostle John uses four times in his epistos.
Antichristos? In Latin, it's vicar of Christ. Vicar Christos. That's written right on the pope's garments. What does that mean? Vicar is the preposition in Latin that means the same thing as the preposition in Greek, ante. It means instead of, in place of. I say that on the authority of men like John Knox. You said that back during the reformation. It's true. Anti means in place of. You go to the New Testament, you see it used in in the compounded words. You see it used by itself. It always means instead of or in place of. Mere image of. And if you try to any man tries to take on anybody, submits the taking on of the three branches of government in himself or any government who said they do that, any single will, whether it be a body of a legislature, a single man, a bureaucracy, a single will of a bureaucracy, if they take on those three powers, legislative, executive, and judicial, Jesus Christ will crush them and has, and you can see it in history.
You know, bureaucracies say the president says, okay. I've got now courts. I've got bureaucratic courts, administrative courts. I've got the administrative code. That's my legislation. These are my courts. And then after I take you through the legislation of the courts and my administrative courts, then I will pronounce the judgment. That's antichrist, friends. That's administrative law. That's the law of the city. That's the canon civil laws of Rome. Every country in the world operates that the way at every level except ours, and it's creeping in with us. It's always been creeping in. It's our job to slap it down like a red headed stepchild.
[02:08:17] Unknown:
Hey, Brian.
[02:08:18] Unknown:
Yeah. Somebody wanna say Yeah. It's just a fun comment.
[02:08:21] Unknown:
Yeah. Go ahead. Then the the lady wants to talk. Make it quick, please. Thank you. Yep. Sure will. Sure will. I appreciate your comments, Brent. And, just my final one is that, when when we boil it all down, we have to look at the reality of situation, which is families like Lake and Riley have been, devastated. Molly Tibbets and other women have been murdered by illegals. Plus you have, to thousands of families that have been devastated by fentanyl poisoning, losing kids and all that. So that's why I think the American people just want a final resolution of this so we don't have to go through this with too many more people. So thanks, Brent. Well, thank
[02:08:56] Unknown:
you. Well, Dag Emmett, we do have a final resolution, and we're commanded to not pay an attempt not not to not to be oriented to the outcome. This is the hard thing. The Bible commands us to be oriented to the process. The outcome is bad. The only way to control the outcome is to focus on getting the process right. We will never stop the rape, the murder unless we focus on the process and say, well, this federal judge is subject is dependent upon the president to enforce his orders through the US marshals. The president is dependent upon the federal judge. They're each pushing. They each hate each other. They're fighting, and the legislative branch the same way. Still, I say, no. Our common law tradition is not outcome oriented at all. Once you become outcome oriented, as ugly as it is, you wanna stop it. It. But the only way to stop it is to be process oriented. If you become outcome oriented, soon enough, the ends will justify the means. God doesn't allow us to do that. He doesn't allow it. That's the motto of the Jesuits order. The ends justifies the means. Once you have that in your head, torture becomes lawful, and it is with them. The inquisition, the law of the city, the entire world is inquisitorial.
That means the ends justifies the means. We don't wanna go there. That's why we oh, we know the evil that's occurring out here. How are we gonna stop it? Not by going out there and stopping it because that won't stop it. What will stop it is getting the process right, insisting upon due process, insisting upon common law government of three separate and coequal branches, supporting the independence of mind of those in those three branches, such as Trump. Do what you think is right, g DJ. You took an oath to the constitution. That means you gotta do what you believe the constitution says, not what the federal judge says. Mhmm. Okay. That's I'm good. Glad you brought that up. I'm excited about I'm excited about all that. Go ahead, Robert. His oath has one word in it. The other dose don't have it. That's preserve.
[02:11:00] Unknown:
Joan was wanting to ask a question. Our little Costa Rican listener. Hi, Joan.
[02:11:05] Unknown:
Hi. Hey, Brent. Regarding Wayne's important matter, is our government of is or is not our government of, for, and by the American people? Thank you.
[02:11:27] Unknown:
Well, Deuteronomy chapter 17 says that those you choose as leaders among you must be of you. That's the ablative of source. That means from you. It must be one of you. Our leaders must be one of us. Why? So that our government will be for us. And that is true. And that that is true in our common law tradition as well. That's why the president of The United States must be born, natural born. There are two requirements to be natural born. He must fill both of them. Not only must he have been born on the territorial within the territorial boundaries of one of The United States or possessions, he also both of his parents must have been natural citizens at the moment he was birthed.
DJ Trump fills that requirement. His mother is a foreigner, was a foreigner. She was from the Isle Of Lewis off the coast of Scotland. She immigrated to The United States. But when she gave birth to DJ, she had become a citizen through proper channels. That's lawful. Tom Cruise? Or what was his name Thomas? Senator Cruise. Not Tom. That's the other one. Tel Aviv Tel Aviv Tel Aviv. Yeah. He's not a natural born citizen last time I checked, and neither was Rubio. He ran for president. He wasn't a natural born citizen. We had another one. I can't remember his name, but I'm saying we're not as careful.
Well, Obama. That one's right. Yeah. He wasn't either. Why? Because we want a government. If the government's from us, one of us, if those running that are of us, they will be for us. At least we stand a good chance. But you have somebody from another country, they're gonna have that natural inclination, of course, to be loyal to the land of their birth. God put that in all of us. It's not that we're against them. They can come here. They can be governor. They can be a judge, but they can't be, but they can't be president of The United States. And then for Common law. Yeah. Common law. But then on and on we go. This is no small matter. And the law of God fleshes out our common law tradition in a lot of places, not everywhere.
Some places our common law tradition fleshes out, puts to the rubber puts the rubber to the road of the Bible. That's what it does.
[02:13:51] Unknown:
So, yeah, that we we want that. Go ahead. Somebody wants it. I think we're finished. Anybody else got a question? Brent, do you have to go somewhere?
[02:13:58] Unknown:
No. I do. Your schedule's busy. I have to eat this lamb burger. That right here. Rascal. You rascal.
[02:14:05] Unknown:
Yes. Who is that?
[02:14:08] Unknown:
Larry?
[02:14:09] Unknown:
Oh. Hey. Brent.
[02:14:12] Unknown:
So there are some students that believe, because they're being taught by a certain teacher, that the constitution was not put together by the people. It was put together by a bunch of attorneys, and then they say that the constitution was nothing more than a constitution with the emphasis on con as in con job. And I looked it up in in in the national archives, and not every person that ratified the US constitution was an attorney. There is people from different walks of life, like different trades. And so I was wondering, like, what is your thoughts on on that type of, you know, promotion of the US constitution?
Well, the the framer, the man is called the framer of the constitution,
[02:15:07] Unknown:
and rightly so, with James Madison. Remember I said he was the closest student that that, Witherspoon had. And Witherspoon was the unofficial, the unofficial, but nonetheless true de facto leader of the Scottish enlightenment. And the men such as Madison and Jefferson, they weren't lawyers in that sense. As far as I know, they never practiced law. They knew a lot, but I don't believe they practiced law. If they did, there's not much said about it. Now Patrick Henry practiced law. That's true. Quite a while. He wasn't aristocracy. Those other fellows were kind of a natural aristocracy with natural money.
Patrick Henry wasn't. By the way, Patrick Henry was suspicious of the constitutional convention, but he later, affirmed the constitution of The United States. He didn't know anything about it because he wasn't there, and then he was suspicious of it. But remember our constitution of The United States, we give too much too much credit to the men at the convention because our constitution was ratified by was duly ratified by the militiamen of The United States called the people. The people, we, the people of The United States. And they're the ones that gave instructions to their, their representatives to the, to the convention and their, their, representatives are pretty, pretty faithful when you read about it, about doing the will of the people in their particular state.
Some of the state just kept holding off. New York, for example, that fellow wouldn't commit himself to anything till the very end. He wouldn't even vote. He'd say I respectfully respectfully abstain. You know, he wouldn't he didn't want anybody to know what he was thinking because that's what they told him to do. And but it's the people of The United States. Now if you're gonna attack the the the ones in the convention for being lawyers, that's kinda silly, I think. Lawyers are someone very easy to demonize. But and because they're the they're the ones that people think are abusing, and often they are, but preacher abuse the truth even more. And most people I know that aren't preachers and lawyers abuse it even more than that. That's just blaming the other guy. And, when you got an upfront man, you blame him. That's just part of the territory, But don't get the idea that we're looking, as I said before, and don't get the idea we're looking for good men to run the government or to have, had a hand in drafting the constitution.
Any more than we would look at the people in the Bible that that pinned the bible to be, upstanding men. They weren't. Oh, they were men that were convicted, but you got some really ugly people in this game. I mean, have you ever read the story about Abraham? Have you read of the life of David? These are murderous, bloody, weak, emotionally weak people. But God, the Bible says, delights in confusing the useful idiots of the evil empire with those that are weak and even unlikely. See, to not recognize that is to not recognize the the righteousness of our God and the deplorable condition of his people.
The Bible even says that the agents of God, we call them angels, look with wonder upon God's people and say, how in the world does our God, our maker, this is the angels talking, get these people to want to try to obey him. That's what God's people want to do. They don't do a very good job, but God uses his people. But to not recognize that God will get his way, God's the only one, speaking of the constitutional convention, God's the only one that can make a straight lick with a crooked stick. He took the nation of Israel, crooked a stick as you can find, and made a straight lick I used them to deliver up and and murder the sacrifice for the sins of the rest of the nations. That's us.
And like, that the prime minister of Britain said, he was Jewish. What was his name back in the eighteenth? Disraeli. Oh, Disraeli. He said he said, oh, I don't understand why people hate Jews. He said Jews are just like everybody else, only more so. Just like everybody else, only more so. Well, the reason we're laughing is because that's true. You can't when it comes to sinfulness, there are no putting it in categories in the eternal sense. Now, one, Paul the apostle says, if you've broken the law of God, if you've reached it at one point, you're guilty of have having broken all of it and you are worthy of death.
What did what did, God say to our grandpa Adam in the garden? In the day you disobey this one is one point. Dying, you're dead. And that's why we're in this deplorable condition. God is so perfect, so holy, so sinless, so well, you you run out of words to describe it, but he is so much that way that he will not tolerate any imperfection in his presence, the bible says. And the only way that we can come to him boldly as we do. We boldly approach the eternal throne, said Wesley. But we do. The bible teaches that because he sees us through the cleansing of his son Jesus Christ, who even though we aren't perfect, we are in him as it says, and he sees us in him.
We ourselves are positionally perfect. You know, Christianity has always made the distinction, and I pass it along to you, it's biblical, absolutely biblical. There's a distinction with a Christian man between his position and his practice. His position is perfect before his maker. His practice is not. But his maker is cleaning him up day by day, putting open putting a whooping on him where he needs to, taking away the things that don't matter. You've talked about Stewart Rhodes. Stewart, I I interviewed Stewart one time. He was nasty when I interviewed him. And I know why. I mean, he was, he was just terrible. He just, I couldn't get him to relax. Why? Because at that point he was afraid of everything and everybody and afraid of what I would do to him. And he didn't know what was going on and the lay of the land. He was deep in the ditch wrestling around with the devil himself, and they finally got him and threw him in jail.
Now he's out. Now he's calculated. I would say well, I say this as somebody that's been thrown in jail a few times. It has an effect on you. It's a good effect. It's a good effect. You know, Paul the apostle, when he went He traveled all over the Roman empire carrying the gospel. And when he'd get there, he'd go to the synagogue first because he knew those people. He understood them. Well, they finally got so nasty with him, tried to kill him a few times, beat him up, had him just scourged with whips, all sorts of things. Finally said, I can't take this anymore. Blood's on your head, boys. I'm done with you. I'm going to the other nations.
And he did. He went to the other nations. But everywhere he went, the Jews dogged him. Terrible. Read the book of acts. The new testament is all about the prototype of false religion and what it does and the warnings we have against it. And by the way, to drop a footnote well, I'm gonna drop a footnote after I finish. When Paul the apostle went into a town as he traveled, he never asked, never asked what the hotels were like. He always asked what the jails were like, That's where he knew he'd end up, and he did. But he got a lot done. Well, the, the, the admonition in the New Testament against those of false religion is just leave them alone.
Don't bid them Godspeed is the That's a lot in that Greek word, beautiful word, Godspeed. Don't have them into your house. Don't be friends with them. Don't buddy up with them. Don't attack them. This is the command of the new Testament under the old Testament. Do not attack them. Specifically, Jews don't attack them. Just treat them as what? Tax collectors. That's easy. How do you treat a tax collector? Well, you certainly don't call him and tell him off. You don't go looking to antagonize him, twist his nose. No, you just leave him alone. Hope he leaves you alone. And if you see him on the street and it's uncomfortable not to say hi, you say hi. As the Bible says, honor all men, honor all men. That includes the Jew, but it doesn't say go out of your way to be his friend. Just leave him alone. You see the whole world right now is up in arms against him and they're fighting and debating. And that's not, that's not where God wants us. And if we get there and we get on the attack mode, like the, like the German people did, we'll destroy our nation. You're not If you do that, you're not following the command. As a Christian man, you're not following the command of Jesus Christ.
He said just back off, leave them be. They're okay. Don't antagonize them. If you do what he says, he will take care of the problems that we have, whatever they are. It's not up to me to say, I just know what I'm supposed to do. I'm in his army. He's my, he's my commander. I do what he says. He says, just leave him alone. My father said to me, I have trouble with somebody. I go to him, dad, I don't know what to do. What are you talking about? Well, so and so doing this and doing that. I remember my dad just said this all his life. It's biblical. He say, get away from it.
Get away from it. Yeah. Yeah. Now maybe somebody said that to some of you, maybe your parents have said that they don't be trying to get, you know, having another conversation isn't gonna change anything. See? No. Go ahead. All it's gonna do is accelerate it and probably amplify it. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Do what Jesus said. And dad was telling me that. Yeah. Okay. Yep. Walk away. Everybody's better off. Mhmm. Brent? Hey, Brent. Yeah. I'm here. I'm here.
[02:25:48] Unknown:
Go ahead. Hey. This is Larry.
[02:25:50] Unknown:
Yeah. Just two things real quick. I really enjoyed your trust class, the other night. I've I've already listened to the first, presentation four times. It's just I learned something new every time I listen to it. It's just a lot to grasp. And, so I really appreciate you putting those together. And, I was just two things, getting back to what you said before, there is none righteous, no, not one. I believe in that verse, it says there's none that do with good. And I was listening to a preacher one time and he was saying that, you know, the King James translators, they, they had an agenda in, you know, in some areas when they were doing their translation.
And, he did some research, and and he, when he started researching Psalm thirty seven twenty three, and that's the verse that says the steps of a good man are ordered by the Lord. He's he found out that that word good is not even in the original Hebrew and he concluded that the King James translators had an agenda. They were being, you know, I guess, you know, promoted or pushed along by the king. And I was wondering, I know you've you've looked at every most every word in the Bible in in your, translation that you put together. Do you find that to be true that that word good is not there in the original Hebrew in that particular verse?
And, the only other other thing I have for you is there's a lot of talk between, like, using the words attorney and lawyer and a lot of people think they're synonymous. Do you prefer to be called a lawyer or an attorney and what's the difference? Those two things.
[02:27:54] Unknown:
Brent, did you take off?
[02:27:58] Unknown:
There you go, Larry. You broke Brent.
[02:28:01] Unknown:
Wow. No. I'm eating I'm eating Okay. Alright. There he is. There he is. I'm eating corn chips. I'm eating corn chips. So when Larry was talking, I killed the mic, and then I forget to turn it back on. But this corn chips, you know, they can make a lot of noise as you know by Oh, yeah. You can hear them. Anyway, attorney, the word attorney is a Norman French word that, Normans brought to England in the year October.
[02:28:30] Unknown:
And
[02:28:32] Unknown:
it means it means agent. What's an agency? Well it's a man that's delegated one man delegates to an agent authority to do certain things or a lot of things. It is a fiduciary contract. There are fiduciary contracts and non fiduciary contracts. An agency, as is a trust, is a fiduciary relationship. So it's a good word. There's nothing wrong with it. I'd rather be called a lawyer, but there are times when I call myself an attorney in certain context in the court so that the courts will understand what I my position is or what the other guy's position is. Because lawyers are not even taught what a fiduciary duty is these days.
Aren't even taught. They don't even know a lot of them. It's not but if if you're gonna be a lawyer or you're a fiduciary, you ought to know what fiduciary obligation is, and there is no class on fiduciary obligation. Oh, there may be class on trust and estates, but not specifically on what we call a fiduciary relationship, and there ought to be. I agree. Okay. Now you make an excellent point. Some, oh, by the way, a lawyer is is what that has the same, like understanding of a sawyer. And when my granddad and my dad ran a sawmill, they always make a few bucks on the side sawing trees up for people so they don't they got trees. They don't have to go buy lumber. Well, the man that ran the sawmill, we called sawyer.
He ran the blade. But what does a sawyer do? Why do they call him a sawyer? Because he would set the sawyer, and I used to watch men do this, set and set the teeth on the blade They had a little tool they did well, you bend it a certain way, and then you sharpen each blade by itself, a little tool you set on the blade and crank it. Sharpen the blade, or the the tooth I mean. And the sawyer is the man that makes the saw cut to the advantage that he wants. Makes the saw cut to the application he wants. Sawyer, that's what a lawyer is supposed to do. He's supposed to take the law and show how it cuts to the application that he believes it ought to cut to given a specific set of circumstances.
I like that word. I like the example. Yeah. Hell, well, thank you, Roger. The the other word for Sawyer doesn't fit. That's a that's a limb that bobs up and down in a flowing river in the Mississippi Valley. That's the fourth word. That's called the sawyer because it goes up and down like a sawmill. But that's not what I mean. But attorney is a good word too. Now coming to the Psalm thirty seven twenty three, I wanna know, do you remember the Bible teacher's name who told you that there was no word for good in Psalm thirty seven twenty three?
[02:31:27] Unknown:
Yeah. He's, out of Connecticut. Rodney starts with a b, bureau or
[02:31:36] Unknown:
I have to I have to look here. Here's what I here's what I wanna say about him. Whoever he is, he's telling the truth and he's given attention to detail. He's right. There is no word for good in that verse. The only word there the word for man is not just any man. It's the word gabor. Now in other words, the archangel Gabriel, gabor, Gabriel, gabor el. That means, El. It means law giver. Mighty man of the law giver. Agent in that case, angel, gay Gabriel. But what it says is that, a geboar, a mighty warrior, his ways are ordered by the Lord. Remember a while ago I said, just biblical, you see it everywhere. You see it here in a small way. Maybe not an overt way, but our God is the God of war.
Our God of love is the God of all war. The Bible says that the rider, the rider prepares the horse.
[02:32:38] Unknown:
Mobile. Somebody somebody's chomping in on us. If your mute just change everybody. Check your mute, please. The rider
[02:32:46] Unknown:
the rider prepares the rider prepares the horse for battle, but victory is from the Lord. I don't care what you do. The God of war, the only God of war, will dictate the outcome of every conflict. And you may not understand why or how he did what he did or why you lost or the other looks like the bad guy won, but just keep in mind when the the, captain of the Lord's army is when Joshua met him before the battle of Jericho. He saw him out at the edge of camp. He was walking by himself, and he said essentially, halt who goes there, like military men do. He said, who are you?
Are you forced or against us? And the mighty warrior said neither. I am the captain of the armies of Yahuah. Now here's the significant point I'm gonna make. Are you for us or against us? He said neither. And that's the way God is. Our God is above everything. You don't we don't need to be worrying about him getting on our side or getting him on our side. We need to be worried about us making sure we're on his side. That's our task. And that shouts. And in this verse, Psalm, what did you say, 37, I think it was? Yeah. Thirty seven twenty three. Yeah. There is no word good. It just says the the steps of a mighty warrior.
Not just any man, a mighty warrior are ordered by Yahuah. Let me look here at the Numeric and Standard to see if it does it. They translate Numeric and Standard translates blameless person. No. That's not right either. There's a word for blameless in Hebrew and it's not in this verse. Ain't it amazing though? And I and numerical standard is about as good a bible translation as you can find that's well known on the open market. Matter of fact, it is. I would argue it is. But I don't like the way they did this here. By the way, I I knew, he's gone now, the editor, the editing translator of the New American Standard Bible.
I'm surprised he says this here, or he let it go. But you know when you translate the Bible, there's so much to it. And I don't care how many times, and I've gone over it a lot, you just There's so many things to catch because these tongues are not spoken tongues anymore, so they're obscure. They're in writing. We can study them. We can know them. But there's a difference between that and having it as your native tongue. And none of the words of the Bible are native. Oh, by the way, Paul, you'd mentioned the Lord's prayer and the Aramaic and all, and Jesus spoke Aramaic.
There's really no proof of that. Maybe he did, probably did. I mean, from what I understand about the first century and Palestine, yeah. But God chose not to record the Bible in Aramaic. He chose to record it in Koine Greek, the street Greek of the Roman empire, the merchants Greek, the sailors Greek, the pigeon Greek of the Roman empire. And that's what we've got to go on, that's what he has given us. And to try to go to another tongue would be to add to the Bible. Aramaic, they spoke it around. We have ancient documents in Aramaic, but that's not the focus of my study. Although I do know Aramaic words, some of them. There are some in the Bible. Aramaic in the book of Daniel and the other, and a couple other books, A scattered word throughout so you learn a little bit about Aramaic or pericopes of it in the bible.
And I'll focus on it there where it's in the old testament. But God in his sovereignty has chosen to deliver his newer testament in Koine Greek. And that's that's the final word. That's the final word. Brent, go ahead.
[02:36:53] Unknown:
Yeah. Just a follow-up. So do you have you ever come up since you're you were already aware of what I just asked about, have you do you have any theories as to why the King James translators, and I don't know how many were involved in this, why they add it to the word of God in that particular verse. Have you ever thought about what have have you ever come up with any theories as to why?
[02:37:16] Unknown:
Oh, I know. Well, I know overall. You and you can go to the Internet. We don't have to go look this stuff up. Go to the Internet and look up what the King James orders to his translators. It's all there. And, the overall purpose of the King James Bible and the translation was to overcome the overwhelming popularity of the Geneva Bible. That's the purpose of it. That's the only reason that it came to fruition. Half the translators were Puritans. That means they were Biblical Anglicans. A Puritan was a Biblical Anglican.
An Anglican had the doctrines that were reformed. Read the 39 articles of the Anglican church. They're beautiful. I I adhere to most f substantive everything everything there. And their clergy swears to it. They don't believe any of it. No practice. It's odd. But the Puritans the Puritans were biblical Anglicans, and, they were on about half of them or so. I don't know. I'd be able to back and count, but they believe the Bible. A lot of them didn't believe the Bible was true. Didn't care. They but all of them, every translator on that translation team had to swear an oath that he supported the law of the city, the civil law, the canon civil law of Rome's doctrine of government called the divine right of kings.
That that in other words, king James was a government of a single will. And they didn't support that. And there were some men in England exceedingly bitter until they died because they were the ones they thought that really had the wherewithal and qualified to be on that translation team and wanted to be, but King James wouldn't let them on. As as qualified or more qualified of many of the men that were there. The other reason that there's trans or, false yeah. It's false. Added words, takeaway words. Why? Because one of King James' orders was that when it came to a choice, when it came to the translator's choice between elegance and accuracy, he ordered them to choose elegance.
That was the policy of the King James Bible. Because he did that and these men were capable men, the King James Bible, I think, is clear. As beautiful as shake Shakespeare is, it's not as beautiful as the King James Bible. The rhythm and the cadence of that book are overwhelming. But the trouble is in some of those, the word of God comes across, but it's not as accurate. If you choose accuracy for translation, your your translation is going to be clumsy in some places. You know, Bible translation was that when when Wycliffe did his translation in the thirteen hundreds, all he had was the Latin Vulgate. He didn't have the original tongues. And if you read his translation into that ancient English, it reads like Latin and people think it's nothing but Latin. All he did was, he didn't, nobody had ever tried this kind of stuff before. He just took, okay, here's a Latin word, and here's the English word, just word by word. And it's so clumsy. It's hard to read in English. And it was ancient English, but then add the order of the words, it was clumsy.
Well, it wasn't until later that men begin to try to rearrange the words a little bit so it'd be smooth English, which is which is okay to do. I do that. I rearrange them. I try to make sure I put every word in because like in the Bible, it doesn't say, Jesus Christ's mother. It says the mother of him, Mary, the mother of him. Well we don't say that in English. We say, Jesus mother Mary. So there's a rearrangement of words. And in the Greek tongue, the arrangement of the words didn't matter. They'd arrange words any way they wanted and still understood what they said because the endings of the words are what tell you whether it's the direct object or the indirect object or the noun or the verb or the adjective, and they had and do have. It's a highly inflected language. The most the highest the highest put this in good English. There's no language among men that has been as highly inflected as Greek.
It's it's for communicating detail like no other tongue ever was. That's why I say I can go through it. There there are fifteen, twenty things with every word you can notice. You know, there's I counted one time at least 14 ways to translate a verb or or to 14 forms you can put a verb into to translate it. Well you gotta pay attention to all those as you're translating or you might miss something. It's not a small task, Hebrew is not that complex but at the same time Hebrew does allow for rearrangement of words and that's a new innovation. Even in the late eighteen hundreds the translators would not rearrange the words to make it smooth English and it has it does the same things that Greek does in a lot of ways.
In Hebrew it's not it's not amboses. It would say the mother of Moses' mother would be the mother of him. The mother of him, whereas we would say his mother. You save yourself a couple of words and it makes it smoother English. Now the King James translators didn't do that. And I don't know that that was best. Now we do want to make it word for word as much as possible and and put it across raw and uncooked. And if you do that, and don't worry about elegance, it's going to be wooden and clumsy at some points. But if you're studying the Bible, I don't care. And this translation I did is for me. So whether or not it's clumsy, I know what I'm doing. And I think other people can read it too and understand it if they're serious. Just read it and say, okay, what's he saying here? But it's more precise.
You know the King James translators, I've found places in the King James Bible where they would the same Hebrew root word was translated with over 25. In one instance, almost 50, almost 50, English words and vice versa and vice versa. Well, that I don't blame them for that in the sense. They didn't have computers. They couldn't trace words rapidly enough. Now when I first helped these fellows that were translating the numerical standard, they were he had they had I was part of an army. I was part of an army of students that were looking stuff up and trying to catalog things. Well, today, I can sit in front of a laptop and have that all at my fingertips Mhmm. Amazingly. That's amazing.
And if I don't do something with that, I'm not fulfilling my responsibilities as a teacher. That's why I do it. And I'm I need to do it more. I'm disappointed. I get tired at the end of the day, and I wanna go do something else. But I'm I'm driven at this point in my life to do as much as possible with the laws of nature and the laws of nature's God. I got to talking about myself. But thank you for bringing that up because I'm gonna check the winterized version, make sure I caught that. But, yeah, you're right. And the fellow that was teaching was right.
[02:44:22] Unknown:
Brent, seems like, there was a the the translators wrote a letter, I think, that was in the first version. I'm not sure about subsequent ones that said there were o there there were over 50 or 500 mistranslations, and it wasn't their fault.
[02:44:42] Unknown:
They they say in the prep they say in the preface of the King James, the translators say there's a lot of things we don't know, a lot of things about the Hebrew tongue that hasn't come to light, and there are variations. We give alternate readings in the text. And as time goes on, there'll be other revisions of this. And every Bible translation after the King James in English was a revision of the King James until the publication of the New American Standard Bible, the first publication, that's the one that I was involved with, until 1971.
Everything was a reworking of the King James. Why did they say that? They said that because they were being honest. That's why I don't want to be hard on the King James translators. And they were saying, look, we're gonna, we're gonna keep working on this. And they only had, half a dozen, maybe seven, manuscripts of the new new of the New Testament when they did that translation. Now we have have been discovered almost 6,000, about 6,800 Wow. Manuscripts. They didn't have much. They did a great job. Go ahead.
[02:45:48] Unknown:
Yeah. Yeah. Where do I find evidence of this oath that they had to take?
[02:45:54] Unknown:
I'll tell you where I saw it, and you but yeah. Look it up. I'll tell you where I saw it. It was in a book called How Wide is the Waters? How Wide is the Waters by a fella named Bro I think it was Brobick or Borbick. But How Wide is the Waters? I think it's the name of the book, and it's all about the King James translators. That's what the book's about. It was given to me. The subject, and I find no evidence of that. I'm sorry. I'm curious. Look and see what you can find. If you don't find it there, let's talk again, and I'll say, well, maybe I don't I I remember reading it. Now, I'll look the book up too, and I don't have it. It's around here somewhere, but I don't know where it is. But that's what but obviously, we do know this for sure for now until you are satisfied with the evidence that King James the first was devoted to to him being the government and the law Yep. Being in his breast.
He said that, and that that's why he was such a brutal man, and he was a brutal man. Now you didn't agree with him. He would just chop your head off. I remember reading about now this was in a book by a lawyer. I forget something. The word lion was in the book, but it was about Edward Coke. And during those days when the King James, the Puritans, and others were go requesting meetings with King James about translating the Bible, producing a translation, Edward Coke, he heard in the meeting, he heard King James say, the king protecteth the common law.
And before Koch could catch himself, he ejaculated, I mean, verbally. He said, naysayer, the common law protecteth the king. All of a sudden, the room got real silent. All of a sudden, he realized he had said something he probably wished he hadn't said, and he fell on his face and implored the king to overlook his improvidence. He didn't talk that way to King James, and that was a nice thing to say really. Nay sire, the common law protected the king. He didn't believe that. He believed the king protected the common law. See, Koch held, and rightly so, that the law was above the king. See?
So the law protected the king, not the other way around. Those kind of subtleties were at the forefront of men's minds during the 1516, and seventeen hundreds when our when our country started. They understood those things. They understood the difference between the law of the land and the law of the city.
[02:48:53] Unknown:
Amazing history. Yeah. Well Rent, I gotta go. My stomach is, not agreeable with sick and rent.
[02:49:01] Unknown:
Yeah. This is Bruce from California. Bruce? We had a little Chris. Yeah. We Oh, Chris. We had a little Chris. Yeah. We had a little incident this week that, caused a bit of a distraction. We got up the other morning, and, my daughter was all upset because she was on her way to college. She has to drive there every day. So quite a ways away, actually. And, three of the windows were busted out of her car. Oh. There was glass all over the place. So we had to figure out what to do. She ended up making, an arrangement with the professor to, send her all the materials she needed to study, you know, which is again, we have this blessing of the Internet and computers.
So she took care of that. Then the rest of the day, we scurried around, made some connections, and, got those windows all replaced. We replaced and actually did it ourselves. And, except for the real window, we had a friend of ours put that in who has a glass shop. And, so we got it all straightened out. But in but in the in the, confusion, we overlooked, about the trust class. And, were we supposed to get a a notification by email or something about the start of the trust class?
[02:50:20] Unknown:
Well, Paul is in charge of that group. I'm gonna defer to him if he's still here. If not, you need to get in touch with him. Yeah. That's a Paul question. Yeah. Get in touch with Paul. If you can't reach Paul, go to commonlawyer.com. Say I can't reach Paul, and we'll try to try to raise him.
[02:50:40] Unknown:
Some scratching around there. Thank you, Chris. Sorry about your incident. Okay. I'll see y'all tomorrow. I gotta go, sell up some dentals. Bye, Roger. Bye, Brent. Always a pleasure, buddy. Thank you. You too. Yep. See you soon.
[02:50:58] Unknown:
Bye. We're out of here.
[02:51:23] Unknown:
Hey, Chris in California. Dang. Did did you have any cameras on your daughter's car to see who did it?
[02:51:37] Unknown:
Dang.
[02:52:04] Unknown:
Detroit. Easy to maneuver.
[02:52:14] Unknown:
I know where many of you are still there. I highly recommend you, you know, copy the link for that, debunking
[02:52:23] Unknown:
gender theory. I don't I don't. I don't.
[02:52:27] Unknown:
It's only three minutes. And It's great.
[02:52:35] Unknown:
Not only I just put it up property tax.
[02:52:40] Unknown:
Just like it's just one person.
[02:52:48] Unknown:
Yeah. I just watched that. Unfortunately, she did not need to swallow that, microphone back to back to her molars. Is uncomfortably distorted. But, I mean, what she says is cold. Anyways, anyone else got anything to talk about? We've got about, seven minutes Yeah. And we'll be at the top of the hour.
[02:53:27] Unknown:
I was wondering because I don't have a copy of the New American Standard Bible, but, you know, it's the exception to the rule, but I think it still has the end of the Lord's prayer in square brackets. And of course, that's if somebody's got one, look it up. Matthew six thirteen. And it has a footnote that says this is not found in the older texts. Now all the other most of the other versions just drop it completely.
[02:54:00] Unknown:
Mhmm.
[02:54:03] Unknown:
Interesting. Yeah. I I don't know. I am I was kind of on the fence on that video, which is why I sent it to Brent and asked him to weigh in on it, just because it did smack a little bit of, new age theory. It it was like a cross between theology and new age theory. Now if they would've left the new age crap out of it, I'm thinking that it probably would've been better received. But still, you know, nearly a half million views in fourteen days, that's ridiculous.
[02:54:45] Unknown:
You know, like the Bible says, a little leaven leavens the whole loaf, so you gotta be careful. You know?
[02:54:52] Unknown:
Right.
[02:54:53] Unknown:
Yeah. And guys, I I don't call if you you got the thing I sent out yesterday on almond raw.
[02:55:01] Unknown:
I probably do. Any? Jesse, you keep unmuting. Is that on purpose or not? Jesse? Okay. Well, I hope he forgives me. I've muted him twice, so I'll remove him once and he comes back.
[02:55:26] Unknown:
It's twenty minutes long and he does a good good job of refuting the amen and amen raw. And then if you just look up what if you look up the time and the date of the 1611 and what words meant then to these translators, I mean, you're gonna get a better idea of what they were doing. And that if there is absolutely no place I can find that they took an oath, I've got a book on them called The Learned Men by Gustave West Swift Paine about who these guys were. And there was a lot of opposition between these men, yet they had a uniformly agree on the translation. And if there was one abstention, then a footnote was added to the Bible and an explanation was given why it wasn't unanimous.
And it was rare. Mhmm. It was 47 different people agreeing on something. Imagine doing that today. Imagine doing that here.
[02:56:30] Unknown:
That ain't no. It never happened. You're right.
[02:56:34] Unknown:
So it's a pretty outstanding, statement that these guys who didn't I mean, you had the Puritans, you had the Anglicans, you the Westminster group, you know, you you had the Oxford group. I mean, this was a a group of people that, were all brainiacs and didn't necessarily agree on a lot of things, but they were able to put this thing together, which I think is a miracle.
[02:57:03] Unknown:
Did you actually send that to me or no?
[02:57:07] Unknown:
I didn't send it to you directly because I figure you get so many emails, you probably just lose it in the haze. So I could I could send it to you directly.
[02:57:19] Unknown:
Yeah. Okay. Please.
[02:57:22] Unknown:
But it'll probably be later today because I'm out and about here. So
[02:57:27] Unknown:
Alright. Well, yeah, I get a few 100 emails a day. But, I usually do have certain email addresses that raise red flags, or more accurately, urgent notifications. You know, I have I have some things that, you know, come from people that automatically go to a folder of attachments because they always have attachment.
[02:57:58] Unknown:
So
[02:58:01] Unknown:
I try to The other thing that the other thing that a few months ago, you I would I would argue with you with that the canon is complete. Well, I I'm really starting to doubt that these days, and, there's just so I mean, we're if you really look at the history of that, we're taking, of all people, the Catholic church on it. And even by the time of Luther, Luther's got a problem with a whole bunch of the books. A bunch of these guys did, but we pretty much ended up being the, the the Catholic canon. And what makes them an authority on canon? I mean, and if this is the argument that the God culture gives and says that that canon was actually kept by the the real Levites
[02:59:04] Unknown:
By by
[02:59:24] Unknown:
Let's see. There we go. I think that did it. Now what on earth happened here was that
[02:59:37] Unknown:
Muted the conference conference. This line cannot be unmuted.
[02:59:44] Unknown:
Hello.
[02:59:54] Unknown:
Weird.
[02:59:57] Unknown:
Okay. That was interesting. Who was that? Oh, don't know who that was. Alright. Are you, are you there, Samuel? I think after that, it's a pretty it's, like, basically a perfect time.
[03:00:29] Unknown:
I I muted because I I was echoing so badly.
[03:00:33] Unknown:
Yeah. Okay. Well, I think it's interject? Say what?
[03:00:40] Unknown:
I I'm on the call, and I have something to interject.
[03:00:45] Unknown:
K.
[03:00:47] Unknown:
Who's this? Yeah. Back to the back to the word sovereign earlier in this, phone conference. There's a law in United States Of America, and it's published in United States called volume one. And, it's article article two of the seventeen seventy seven confederacy, which is active, active law, general law and permanent law. In article two, it says that the state is sovereign. It doesn't say the law doesn't say that the people are sovereign. It says that the state that's created by Congress is sovereign. So, because the the the conference talked about the word sovereign when I first got on about two hours ago.
So, I wanted to interject that, what the law says, and and and it's not expressly delegated to congress. The sovereign state is is expressly not delegated to congress. So there's two parts of the state. One state is the land that was donated by congress, and the president of The United States signs it as the grand tour because, when the king lost the war, the revolutionary war of the thirteen colonies, those 13 colonies became 13 states. And all that land went to the private states. There was 13 of them at that time. And it wasn't owned by Congress. It was owned by the state. I don't know if that's comprehendible to anybody. But, but so congress had to create the constitution seventeen seventeen eighty seven.
That constitution that we all know of today, that's what created the the taxing law. And so the state can tax the inhabitants and tax their their citizen, but only only for the new states that we created about the Great Lakes, which is Ohio, Michigan, and, I don't know, there's several of them. The, the king relinquished those lands under the Paris a treaty of Paris. And, that that was the lands that became owned by United States of America, which is Congress. And they were owners of those lands, and a lot of migrants from the original 13 states migrated to the new states that Congress became owner of, and those are the lands that got taxed.
And that wasn't explained by Brent. And I know he knows it, but nobody raised the raised the issue to, for Brent to add that to the equation of sovereign. So so Congress is sovereign over their lands that they owned, that they acquired from the King of England. And and that's where Congress got the powers to tax the people, but they didn't get the powers to tax the people in the 13 states because Congress didn't own those lands. The states owned it, which is, was outside of the congress's they didn't have no power. Anybody have anything to say?
[03:04:43] Unknown:
The original third states were never territories. That land came directly from the king to each state individually, and Texas was never a territory either.
[03:04:57] Unknown:
Right. So there's a territory. The state has it's required by law in the, Northwest Ordinance to become a state. So all new states that became states to add to the original states. There is a criteria that congress created that the state to become a state. Now I'm from Oregon. Oregon became a state in eight a hundred years later, 1859. So 1859, Oregon, before before Oregon became a became a union state, 100% of, Oregon was called a provisional territory at the beginning. A 100% of the territory of Oregon was territory. Well, before Oregon became a union of 1859 to become a member of the union that was created in 1787.
That was the that was the creation of a union where where the states required to have a territory built into it. So Oregon today, when it became a union but before it became a union, the government, United States Congress, gave a lot of lands away by donation through act of congress. And and the other way that, the lands of Oregon was sold by the United States government for a price. And, usually, it was about a dollar an acre back in those days. And so the government of Oregon sold their land that they acquired from the king and became provisional government.
And in that equation, in the year of '27 1859, Oregon became a member of the Union States of 1789. So so but a lot of Oregon, when it when it became a union of of the states, there's the other land of Oregon that was private that either the government sold or they granted through a donation. And and some people are familiar with the term homestead. That that was another law that congress wrote, another donation of land under the Homestead Act. But, so there's two parts of Oregon, and there's two parts of every single state, and there's 50 states. I I I'm just rounded out. It might be 51, 52, whatever it is. Out of the 50 states, there's two lands within the state. One is private, and one is, territory.
And the territory is the one where the where The United States Of America owns it. And and Congress can only write laws in the in the in the lands within the state owned by United States Of America. Congress can only write laws to the lands that United States Of America owns. And outside of what United States Of America owns, only the private people that have private homes, or there could be private, shopping malls, but it's private land. Congress can't write law. And and that's in article two of seventeen seventy seven, not expressly delegated to congress.
But, Congress knows what it means, and, but the people at large, they don't know what that law says. How can So who can How
[03:08:35] Unknown:
go ahead. How how can the creator of something
[03:08:39] Unknown:
not be the sovereign of it? Oh, I agree with that. This the the highest sovereign in heaven and in earth is God almighty, but the people Well, we the people no. We the people created the government.
[03:08:52] Unknown:
Right. And, ultimately, God owns it all.
[03:08:55] Unknown:
Let me rephrase. We the people and outside of we the people are the so there's two we the people. One is, congress. Those people that ratified the states into That call themselves sovereign, but they aren't. Right. Well, they're a part of the state. So when you when you when you join up to be a a member of congress, that's the state. The members of the congress is the state.
[03:09:26] Unknown:
The enabling act, which this which the states had to submit to the federal government guaranteed a republican form of government and certain parameters that would fit into the constitution or they were rejected.
[03:09:43] Unknown:
Right. So so The United States
[03:09:48] Unknown:
okay. So my belief is that is within the constitutional context, the Right. The people the the body of the people are the sovereigns, not the individual. But, ultimately, Jesus Christ is the sovereign over it all, and that's the claim I make in my elodium.
[03:10:08] Unknown:
Okay. Okay. God God is sovereign, but the people of the earth and the Old Testament wanted a king. And if you read the story, God says, you don't want a king, but the people said, we want a king. And God says, we don't. So there's an argument. So, anyway, God gave him a king, and the first king on the earth for the for the Israelites was, Saul. And they mentioned it in this in this telephone conversation. They talked about Saul.
[03:10:44] Unknown:
Yeah. I I and and that's exactly what we did with the fourteenth amendment. We wanted a king.
[03:10:51] Unknown:
I have a king I have a king today called government, but the king in America is called the president. But he's a king, and he tries to tell me what to do. But he can't even tell me what to do on the private land that The United States Of America gave away. And I I live on a piece of land The United States gave away, and the president, granted it with his signature, and Congress wrote the act to do that. That was the powers of the president to give it away. And I have that act of Congress. It's the act of Oregon donation law, the act of 1850.
You can look it up yourself, the donation law for Oregon. It's it was written in the year 1850, and that's when the president of The United States Of America granted lands away for those that made the claim to receive the grant. So Yep. I I have that paper. And and Same as the land patent. Yeah. Yeah. It's what it land patent is another word for deed, but they changed the word land patent to deed. Today, they call it a deed. Oh. But the but the term used in the donation is a land patent, and it has certificate number. And so my certificate number is 5015.
And and and you can go to the county and get that number, which I did. I got the number. And so that was a certificate that was deposited into the vault of the land bureau, and and then it was somebody made a claim to get that number. And and this land that I live on is that claim. And the claim was granted by the president of The United States Of America in '18 I think mine was 1858. The the grants were were put into a deposit box in 1850, but it it might it took twenty, thirty years to get rid of all those certificate numbers. The certificate numbers was the claim, the I mean, the the grant.
So there's there's many, many grants, and, I don't know how many thousands there were, but but it it had a number assigned to it, and the numbers were surrendered when the president of The United States signed his John Henry to the claim and and gave it to the person that met the criteria to get the claim. There was a criteria that you had to had to meet to to receive that claim. And the criteria, one was five years to to clear the land. And then you had to meet the criteria of being married, and you had to meet the criteria of being a a citizen that's written in the act of congress.
And and when you met all the criteria, you had five years to put it together. And after five years, and you met the criteria, you got a you got a grant. It was it was given, but but you had to work for it. And and and then they and then it was the governor I mean, the the president of The United States Of America signed it over. He's the grant he's the grantor, and and the claimant was the grantee. And so that's how the law was written. And there's two laws on the land. One one is written and one is unwritten, but I just quoted a written law that nobody can disprove.
I I put into the air a written law that that, hey, it can be challenged, but it's written. You you can talk about a theory, but where's the written law for it? A lot of people talk, but it's not written. And God has a written law, which is the scripture, and God has an unwritten law. There ain't enough paper in heaven and earth to write all of his, all of his laws onto you. There's that many. So it's for you living an adventure of life is a is a discovery to learn what his unwritten law says. That's on us personally to find out what what what God what God says. But he wrote it in our hearts, And it takes the Holy Spirit to pull it out of our heart and show it to us.
But that's that's a personal relationship with God is the power of the Holy Spirit who says that he's our teacher, and he tells us the truth. It's it's written in the scriptures. He he's the truth, and he he's, yeah, he's our counselor And the most hated entity on the face of the earth is the Holy Spirit. Because the Holy Spirit is the power, and the earth doesn't want people to know that power. And and they they write everything in books and paper to make sure that nobody knows the Holy Spirit, and there's a counterfeit Holy Spirit called the charismatic spirit. That that's the counterfeit. It talks about it in in chapter 24 of Matthew. Talks about the counterfeit holy spirit that does false false signs and wonders.
[03:16:17] Unknown:
Yep. Charismatic church. Yeah.
[03:16:21] Unknown:
Yeah. And and the churches the churches the ecumenical churches are teaching, a false spirit.
[03:16:29] Unknown:
The family members are loaded with it. They're they're they've been going to charismatic Christian churches forever. Yeah.
[03:16:38] Unknown:
Yeah. Loaded with it. And you're right. Like King James. King James changed the changed the words. He hired these scholars, these script writers to change the words and make it sound nice
[03:16:51] Unknown:
and lovely. Yeah. Make it sound pretty. Pretty. Yeah. But then again, of course, he was a today. He was he was a a flamer anyway. So
[03:17:03] Unknown:
Well, he was gay too.
[03:17:05] Unknown:
Well, hello. That's what I'm talking about.
[03:17:10] Unknown:
Oh, okay. Well, you have to say the right word for me to know. Flamer.
[03:17:14] Unknown:
Flamer. But then again I didn't know that. But then again, then again, a a distant ancestor of mine, Frederick the Great. Yeah. Yeah. He, he spent a little too much time, watching his armies as well. So
[03:17:35] Unknown:
what the hell? So this this phone commerce conference is hosted branch to be on this conference?
[03:17:44] Unknown:
On Fridays. Oh, okay. Fridays. It's the I thought The Radio Ranch with cell phone. No. It's the Radio Ranch with hello? It's the Radio Ranch with Rogers Sales. Brent is a cohost on Fridays.
[03:18:04] Unknown:
Oh, okay. Well, this is the first time I've actually been on, and I was invited by somebody I know. Okay. He's listened. Yeah. So I that's why I have a question about how that works. And you just explained it. Thank you.
[03:18:23] Unknown:
This is the Radio Ranch with Roger Sales. We're here Monday through Saturday from eleven to 1PM eastern. And on Fridays, Brent joins Roger, and he basically takes the reins.
[03:18:37] Unknown:
He sure does. Yeah. Yes. He speaks with us. He speak he speaks with authority.
[03:18:46] Unknown:
Yeah. Well, they've been doing the Tasmanian word association hour for over ten years now. Almost fifteen.
[03:19:00] Unknown:
So are you mister Sales?
[03:19:04] Unknown:
No. No. That that was Roger.
[03:19:08] Unknown:
It was Roger before You're talking to goofy sales.
[03:19:13] Unknown:
Yeah. Right. Okay. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Anyways, speaking of which alright. I was trying to do this about eighteen minutes ago, but it is about time to take the stream down because we are still streaming. So thanks for joining us for the Radio Ranch with Rogers sales, the Friday edition, with cohost Brent Allen Winters. You can catch us on eurofolkradio.com, Global Voice Radio Network, rubble.globalvoiceradio.net. You can also catch us on Soapbox TV and, a veritable plethora of other platforms. For more information on the topics discussed, please go to our website, thematrixdocs.com. That's thematrix,d0cs,.com, and we can't wait until the next time you come out here to take a look, have a seat, and set a spell. Thanks for joining us.
Thank you. Blasting the voice of freedom worldwide, you're listening to the Global Voice Radio Network.
[03:20:36] Unknown:
Bye bye, boys. Have fun storming the castle.
Opening greetings and network housekeeping
Roger, Paul, and Brent set the stage for the Friday show
Markets, metals, and Judy Sheltons gold revaluation claim
Philosophy of first principles: asking the right questions
The Good Samaritan reinterpreted: neighbor, law, and grace
Vietnam, war aims, and the primacy of dirt in conflict
Who is Israel? Generational divides and party politics
Call-in segment begins: listeners join the discussion
Property, elodial title, and the law of the land vs. law of the city
CommonLawyer.com: courses, translations, and support
Debate on the Lords Prayer ending and textual evidence
Open Q&A: courts, militias, and separation of powers
Origins of property tax: from Norman feudal dues to U.S. schools
Process vs. outcome: due process, juries, and public safety
Constitutional framers, lawyers, and divine sovereignty
Attorney vs. lawyer; Psalm 37:23 word study; translation choices
Housekeeping and missed class notices; wrap-up begins
Aftershow chatter: sovereignty, land patents, and state vs. federal lands
Sign-off and network close
