Biblical Forensics©

“The Truth Shall Set You Free”

Part 1

The Biblical meaning and understanding of the word “truth” showing its Hebrew derivative is addressed by another Bible/Biblical Forensic (BF#1012). In that segment, the Hebrew word “emet” is explained. In this new series, my focus is on how the truth has been hiding from people, particularly the American public. A giant matrix of perpetual lies goes back a very long time causing the public living a distorted perception of reality. What I share in this series will seem like we live in a different world than truly exists. Believe me, the world we think we know is not reality, and while the truth is out there on the Internet and elsewhere, it remains questionable as to how long one will have access to it. Since President Obama relinquished control over the Internet to the United Nations, we can expect millions of documents will disappear.

Central to this series is John 8:32, “And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free”. The cumulative result of abiding in His Word is a foundational reason of why the Word becomes progressively clear. This statement is not afar to another Jesus made in John 7:17, “If any man will do His will, he shall know of the doctrine….” The word “know” means “come to know” and suggests a knowledge that is learned through experience. Jesus Christ is the “truth” Himself -(John 14:6). To be “free” is to be released from the bondage of sin to have the light of the Holy Spirit dwelling within us instead of darkness. John 8:36 explains that it is the Son who makes one free. The Scriptures teach that to live in sin or to practice sin means to be in bondage to sin. Sin has a strong seductive power over the unbeliever; it can only be broken by the power and authority of the Word of God. But the individual must be willing to yield to the Lord so that He will work within the heart of the person to bring about deliverance -(Philippians 2:13; Romans 6:17-20; 8:21; Hebrews 10:19-23; Ephesians 4:21).

It is most often the case we learn truth through experience; however, a more advantageous approach is to endeavor to discover the truth with the additional benefit of the examination of evidence found through its reality without having to suffer or endure the consequences of unfavorable experiences while seeking it out through trial and error. One of the complexities in discovering truth is know how to research documents and locating the evidence that confirms the truth. I have been a student of history since 1957. Having spent three years as a U.S. Army soldier in West Germany during the Cold War era would wake any 18-year old up and smell the coffee. During those three years, I was stationed with a nuclear artillery battalion close to the East German border. What history I learned in high school was a blur. Shock therapy brought it all into perspective when my commanders stressed upon us our mission and the fact we had a “72-hour lifeline”. Facing the realization knowing what was required, in taking needed action and to get out of harm’s way or be doomed; was like ice water in the face and such that I sought a closer look and began to recognize and appreciate the value the importance of knowing history.

Whatever presuppositions you have about the history of the United States of America, they are likely all wrong, or close to it. The public-school system seeks the uncultivated minds of young people to indoctrinate them by skillfully distorting the facts while inserting untruthful or biased opinion thereby causing them to believe a white-washed version of history. Malcolm Forbes said: “The purpose of an education is to replace an empty mind with an open one”. We are victims of Pavlovian psychological manipulation and much of what we are taught is useless propaganda. Edward Bernays is the father of propaganda. Basically, the psychology behind his theory was gradual programming the mind through manipulating public opinion which he then carried out under the guise of “public relations” until his death in 1995.

The culture is one structured to achieve one purpose: obedience and control over the minds of the public. In ‘Propaganda’ (1928), Bernays argues that the manipulation of public opinion was a necessary part of democracy. In Chapter I, “Organizing Chaos” the opening paragraph begins with: “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.”

I have contemplated this series for some time. Because of the repeated lies carried out by the elite and even more lies are uncovered while our government’s perpetual deceit and deception continues to be exposed; it requires that I share the hidden truth that has been kept from the public for years. The CIA virtually writes the scripts of the mainstream media and calls it news, while in fact, it is propaganda. The CIA recently admitted it has 400 agents writing scripts for the mainstream media. The government, hypocritically, turns around and passes legislation to block the free press on the Internet as “fake news”. Such hypocrisy has a background in the CIA’s “Operation Mockingbird” after its inception and much of its existence and spends up to $4-billion a year to deceive the public. Since there is so much false information circulating through media sources and other avenues, I’ve wrestled with the question of just where to begin. I decided to begin at the point in time where we [the USA] was still a British colony. That is a mouthful and I can tell you that few will believe this despite the evidence I will be sharing in this series.

There is an old cliché claiming, “All roads lead to Rome”. After you read the articles in this series you will understand why that expression is so true.

On July 13, 1205 A.D., Hubert Walter, Archbishop of Canterbury, and Lord Chancellor of England died, creating a vacancy for the most senior position in the Church of England. Technically speaking it was the monks of Christ Church Abbey who had the authority to elect a new Archbishop, although it was customary for them to elect whomsoever the king nominated. Indeed, King John had a specific name in mind. It was his close friend and advisor, John Gray, Bishop of Norwich.

To summarize what is a complicated (and disputed) sequence of events, the monks secretly elected Reginald, their sub-prior and attempted to obtain papal approval of his appointment. When that failed, they bowed to the king’s wishes and in December, 1206 A.D. John Gray was elected. Unfortunately, by this time, both sides had involved Pope Innocent III in the dispute. As it turned out the pope decided not to support either side and on July 17, 1207 A.D. at Viterbo, Italy, he consecrated his own choice, an Englishman named Stephen Langton.

King John refused to accept this appointment and on Sunday, March 23, 1208, Pope Innocent III placed the whole of England under an interdict. This is a ruling like sanctions by one country against another. When that failed to persuade John to change his mind, the pope excommunicated the King in November of 1209 A.D. Although negotiations continued between the king and the Papacy, eventually matters was brought to a head in the Welsh revolt of 1212 A.D., which was further complicated by the news that Philip Augustus of France was planning an invasion of England.

Eventually an agreement was reached at Dover on May 13, 1213 A.D. A formal charter was signed on the 15^th and later ratified at St. Paul’s Cathedral on October 3^rd in the presence of Nicholas, Bishop of Tusculum.

Under this agreement, John surrendered the sovereignty of England and Ireland to the Papacy (do offer and freely concede to …. our lord pope Innocent and to his Catholic successors, the whole kingdom of England and the whole kingdom of Ireland, with all their rights and appurtenances) and promptly received them back from the pope (now receiving and holding them, as it were a vassal, from God and the Roman church) and agreed to pay seven hundred marks every year from England, and another three hundred marks in respect of Ireland.

This stratagem by which John conceded his kingdom to the pope was essentially a diplomatic maneuver which enabled him to be reconciled to the church and included the support of Pope Innocent III. “Henceforth Innocent III abetted the king unswervingly; even in his most arbitrary conduct”.

What follows is the “Concession of England to the Pope”. It is a bit longer than the space in this segment. I will cover as much as possible in this segment and continue with the balance of “Concession of England to the Pope” in Part 2.

The Concession of England to the Pope

John, by the grace of God, king of England, lord of Ireland, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, count of Anjou, to the faithful of Christ who shall look upon this present charter, greetings.

We wish it to be known to all of you, through this our charter, furnished with our seal, that inasmuch as we have offended in many ways God and our mother the holy church, and in consequence are known to have very, much needed the divine mercy, and cannot offer anything worthy for making due satisfaction to God and to the church unless we humiliate ourselves and our kingdoms: we, wishing to humiliate ourselves for Him who humiliated Himself for us unto death, the grace of the Holy Spirit inspiring, not induced by force or compelled by fear, but of our own good and spontaneous will and by the common counsel of our barons, do offer and freely conceded to God and His holy apostles Peter and Paul and to our mother the holy Roman church, and to our lord pope Innocent and to his Catholic successors, the whole kingdom of England and the whole kingdom of Ireland, with all their rights and appurtenances, for the remission of our own sins and of those of our whole race as well for the living as for the dead; and now receiving and holding them, as it were a vassal, from God and the Roman church, in the presence of that prudent man Pandulph, sub-deacon and of the household of the lord pope, we perform and swear fealty for them to him our aforesaid lord pope Innocent, and his Catholic successors and the Roman church, according to the form appended; and in the presence of the lord pope, if we shall be able to come before him, we shall do liege homage to him, binding our successors aid our heirs by our wife forever, in similar manner to perform fealty and show homage to him who shall be chief pontiff at that time, and to the Roman church, without demur.

The Treaty of 1213 A.D. was the beginning of a lie! As this series, will show, that lie has been compounded over the ensuing years in so many ways. William the Conquer came in 1066 A.D. and stole the King’s Title and took the land of the people. There were several revolts in the next five years, which William used as an excuse to confiscate English land and declare it his personal property. He then distributed the land to his Norman followers, who imposed their unique feudal system. Eventually, Normans replaced the entire Anglo-Saxon aristocracy. William, however, retained most of England's institutions and was intensely interested in learning about his new property. He ordered a detailed census to be made of the population and property of England—which was compiled in The Domesday Book (now an invaluable source of historical information).

From the time of William I, in 1066 A.D. to King John, in 1199 A.D., England was in a crisis, so dire in fact, that it was bankrupt. The King invoked the “Law of Mortmain”. The term "mortmain" is derived from Mediaeval Latin mortua manus, literally "dead hand”, so that people could not pass their land on to the church or anyone else without first getting the King’s permission. We know this today as the modern day legal process of “Probate”. It creates lots of business for members of the BAR. Without Mortmain, the King would lose the land he controlled. The Vatican didn’t like that because the King owed the pope a sizeable amount of money.

The Concession of England Treaty signed by King John on October 3, 1213 A.D. ratified his surrender of his kingdoms to the pope, as Vicar of Christ who claimed ownership of everything and everyone on earth. This Treaty raises a series of significant questions about a document that remains in effect to this day. These two issues impact every human on the planet.

The first question:

Where in the Bible does Jesus Christ ever give any man this kind of comprehensive, overarching power over all men including land? The fact is, He didn’t. Jesus Christ did not create a religion nor did He create the office of pope.

The second question:

Can a third party break a contract between one individual and another under duress? One cannot be forced into a contract under modern day UCC 1-207 and claim UCC 1-103. The “UCC” stands for the Uniform Commercial Code, the basis of all Law today. The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), first published in 1952, is one of several uniform acts that have been put into law with the goal of harmonizing the law of sales and other commercial transactions across the United States of America (U.S.) through UCC adoption by all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. territories. Everything today comes under the power of the UCC.

The contract (Treaty of 1213 A.D.) was between two parties. Now the Barons of England would not tolerate being slaves anymore so they took up their swords and made King John sign the Magna Carta (a charter agreed to by King John of England at Runnymede, near Windsor, on June 15, 1215.)⁽⁵⁾ First drafted by the Archbishop of Canterbury to make peace between the unpopular King and a group of rebel barons, it promised the protection of church rights, protection for the barons from illegal imprisonment, access to swift justice, and limitations on feudal payments to the Crown, to be implemented through a council of 25 barons. Neither side stood behind their commitments, and the charter was subsequently annulled by Pope Innocent III, leading to the First Barons' War.

This is the same Magna Charta that whereby a recognized sovereign is subject to the rule of law and document the liberties of free men, which provided the basis of Anglo-American Jurisprudence. When they created the Magna Charta, doesn’t this act by the Barons violate the principle of natural law, signifying that it had no force and effect upon a contract between two parties? The other contract party, Pope Innocent III thought so, for he declared the Magna Charta to be: “...unlawful and unjust as it is base and shameful … whereby the Apostolic See is brought into contempt, the Royal Prerogative diminished, the English outraged, and the whole enterprise of the Crusade greatly imperiled.”

To provoke strife in England and Ireland that would support his position, the pope then appealed to Jesus Christ by using His teachings to his advantage. The pope’s agent cited the two Gospels of the Apostles in Matthew 10:34-36 and Luke 12:49, 51-53. Nothing reveals the contradictory nature of government and religion more clearly than these facts.

A third question arose:

What did the Treaty or contract of 1213 A.D. create? Was it a TRUST or a CONTRACT? Only the two parties, the King’s heirs, and the Pope, can break the contract. The Trust or Contract cannot be broken if there are heirs to both sides of the contract. This point is vitally important to the issue at stake. It is amply clear that the pope of the Roman Catholic Institution owns everyone and everything through the rite of succession.

At this point in time in history we now know who controlled the Kings of England and the land of the world. For now, we have the Pope claiming the whole Western Hemisphere besides all of Europe. The Holy See of Antioch ruled all the easterly side and the Holy See of Alexandria ruled the western side, so there was a serious conflict. The conflict was between each of the Holy Sees. One exercised control the western front (America) and the other took control the China side with the dividing line somewhere in Spain and France through Germany with the Pope as the figurehead.

The King’s explorers had come to the Americas to claim dominion over land by deceiving and murdering the natives, the indigenous American Indians. The King operated under the Treaty of 1213 A.D. and everything proceeded smoothly as planned until the 1770’s when a band of rogues calling themselves the “Founding Fathers” decided they wanted the benefits but not to be obligated to pay taxes to the King. The Boston Tea Party followed. They, being lawyers, and professional educated men, didn’t know they were still under the pope’s control. They were unaware of the surrender of King John and his Concession Address to Pope Innocent III some five hundred years before. It is this sticking point where their lies and fraud now would affect the American colonies and the people who lived on the land.

Those common people who fought in the American Revolution were unaware that the 1213 Treaty still ruled despite the fact they THOUGHT the Magna Charta was a viable piece of legal work. The Declaration of rights in 1689⁽⁴⁾ declared the Rights of the British subjects in England. At the end of the English Declaration it stated at Section III – “…that should any of the Rights just mentioned be in violation of the HOLY ALLIANCE (1213 Treaty) … it is as if this Declaration was never written.”

So, we know that the English Declaration didn’t fly, at least not in the eyes of the Papacy so what makes anyone think the 1774 A.D. Declaration of Rights,⁽⁶⁾ in this British Colony would work? Weren’t these people doing the same thing as the Barons did in 1215 A.D. to King John? A contract is a contract. So, it would seem to be so.

Look at Article 1, Section 10, and clause 1 of the United States Constitution. Can anyone obligate a contract? Were the “Founding Fathers” trying to obligate a contract between two parties that still have heirs living today?

Article 1, Section 10, and clause 1 of the United States Constitution

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Control of the Congress.

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

A fourth question arises:

How important is the “ultimate benefactor” the pope, The HOLY SEE, in the scheme of things? Moving through history to modern times - look up Public Law 88-244⁽¹⁾ which follows Public Law 88-243 – the institution of the law – merchants Uniform Commercial Code. We soon begin to see a big problem. Are you surprised that the pope (Rome) is listed in this Public Law? If you are not aware of this fact, then you should be.

Doesn’t the United States have an ambassador in the Vatican today?⁽²⁾ Why? Is it a government like all other nations such as France, Japan, Spain, or Brazil? The Vatican runs the world and it controls the British Crown. Is it any wonder they separate man’s Church and government? They don’t talk about the Lord Almighty’s Church (government) do they? “Organized churches” are given special tax privileges because the Vatican dictates to the United States trustees through the trust document, the U.S. Constitution created by the 1783 Treaty⁽⁷⁾ between the King, front man (agents) for the Vatican, and Adams, Hartly, Laurens, & Franklin who were operating for the King and not for the people of America. Look at Article VI of the Constitution of the United States for your answer as stated in the ‘New History of America’.⁽⁸⁾

You see, we are still under the control of the pope who rules over all nations as he declared he did back in 1213 A.D. The Treaty of 1783 did say in the opening statement quoted exactly as it appears in olde English: “It having pleafed the Divine Providence to difpofe the hearts of the Moft Serene and Moft Porent Prince George the Third, by the grace of God, King of the Great Britain, France, and Ireland, Defender, of the Faith, Duke of Brunfwick and Laurenberg, Arch Treafurer and PRINCE ELECTOR OF THE HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE, & C. AND OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,…..” Those words in capital letters are the basis of this entire issue that is: the pope still rules us. Do you grasp the last few words?

This is a ruling being required from a King (man) who can supposedly make no claim over the United States of America because he was defeated! The King claims God gave him the almighty power to pronounce authoritatively that no man can ever own property because it "goes against the tenets of his church, the Vatican (Holy Roman Empire) and because the King is the “Elector of the Holy Roman Empire”.

What about the secret Treaty of Verona, made on the 22^nd of November, 1822⁽⁹⁾ which shows the power of the pope and the Vatican’s interest in the U.S. Republic?

This provides an ideal breaking point to be continued in the next segment. The background to the “Big Lie” has been laid out for your reading and hopefully, its understanding. This is all very important to the truth of our sovereignty, and as you shall see in the next segment, this truth cost a loyal American patriot his seat in the U.S. Congress, his career, and his life for revealing a secret that our own government has covered up since the days of the “Founders” of this Republic.

Anyone doubting any of what I have shared here can quickly read for him/her self the book: ‘They Own It All: (Including You) by Toxic Currency’, first published in 1996 by co-authors, Robert MacDonald and Robert Rowen. The New People Order web site is www.newpeopleorder.com.

To be continued in Part 2.

Pastor Bob

Notes: