Flawed Redemption Process

[Jerseee]

jerry,

God does not move within the bowels of the money changers. Their will and their mission is not a righteous one. The things you speak of are things that lead to some sort of righteousness.

If you can prove that God (The Almighty) favors the money changers, then your post might have some validity.

This was not a question of Moses, the Torah, the Constitution, Statutes, or any of those things...this was about the UCC and the rules of the money changers. Those are separate rules set by a handful of men obviously hell bent on ecomonic conquest. Those rules are not from public officials charged with protecting their constituents. The UCC rules change all the time and sometimes without notice to all. If you can, provide one scripture within any biblical writings that change constantly you may have a good point.

But it stands to reason that if you beg for redemption under the auspices of the UCC and the money changers, then they are the masters. Who would be in control if they (the money changers) asked you to change your policy so they can get remedy according to your policy?

This is why so many people are getting misled with this UCC stuff. The so-called gurus are mixing this up with scripture and it is blantantly written that Jesus did not find favor with the money changers. In fact, this was the only time that I can recall that Jesus allegedly got violent and turned over tables.

Be careful my friend, your position is not even supported by scripture but yet you using scripture to support the UCC.

Originally Posted by Jerseee

jerry,

God does not move within the bowels of the money changers. Their will and their mission is not a righteous one. The things you speak of are things that lead to some sort of righteousness.

If you can prove that God (The Almighty) favors the money changers, then your post might have some validity.

This was not a question of Moses, the Torah, the Constitution, Statutes, or any of those things...this was about the UCC and the rules of the money changers. Those are separate rules set by a handful of men obviously hell bent on ecomonic conquest. Those rules are not from public officials charged with protecting their constituents. The UCC rules change all the time and sometimes without notice to all. If you can, provide one scripture within any biblical writings that change constantly you may have a good point.

But it stands to reason that if you beg for redemption under the auspices of the UCC and the money changers, then they are the masters. Who would be in control if they (the money changers) asked you to change your policy so they can get remedy according to your policy?

This is why so many people are getting misled with this UCC stuff. The so-called gurus are mixing this up with scripture and it is blantantly written that Jesus did not find favor with the money changers. In fact, this was the only time that I can recall that Jesus allegedly got violent and turned over tables.

Be careful my friend, your position is not even supported by scripture but yet you using scripture to support the UCC.

I acknowledge your response, however I reserve the right to maintain my position. This conversation will obviously lead into another partisan separation of the members of this group, much akin to the separation between the democrats and republicans, the catholics and protestants, etc.

We do not need that type of distraction. Suffice it to say that you have your beliefs and I have mine. On this topic, we will have to agree to disagree. However, be mindful of the fact that you did not use quotations when you attempted to repeat what you alleged that I stated.

[Jerseee]

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

Are not the Federal and State Statutes codifications of the law (mans law)? How about the Constitution? Is the Constitution not an assortment of ideas formulated by the hands of man to act as law for society? What about the ten Commandments? Has anyone seen the tablets of stone? Then from a practical standpoint, even those can be construed as mere ramblings of some ancient man or just a myth. This is not stated to question anyones faith, as I also believe that they (The Commandments) are from God. This is merely to show that without the evidence, you cannot backup your beliefs. It is a matter of FAITH and has little to do with whether or not a man or woman is serving one God or a thousand gods. The things that are, were made by God, and exist by the permissive will of God, therefore, it is not ours to question how God will USE any of those things that He has made. God is Sovereign over all that exists, to include the laws of man and the UCC and the Torah or any other system of behavioural restraints. God instructed Moses to use a wooden rod to lead His people out of Egypt... could it be said that Moses was serving another god in using that rod? God sent an angel to speak to Jeremiah through a jackass, could it be said that Jeremiah was serving two masters in carrying out the dictates of this jackass? So it is with the UCC, the USC, the FRCP, FRCE.. God will allow us to use whatever is necessary and within His will to accomplish the design that He has set up.

Jerry,

All is good and folks can read, so I did not know I needed to quote you if your position is your position. You are free from reprisal here my friend. Nothing can be taken personal or heartfelt because the truth will endure nonetheless, regardless of any personal freedom process. Our forum is nothing like politics or politicians. I have been wrong before and I have apologized before. Pride is not my enemy and I only state what I can know. Which is what I did in response to your post. By the way, you can rebut my statements and answer my question(s) anytime.

No one here (especially me) wants to change anyone's belief. A flawed system will reveal all to anyone. This subject has not taken away from the site. In fact, folks still post here and there within the site about UCC topics and strategies.

I agree that folks are free to believe what they wish despite popular opinion. I still maintain that the good book shows no evidence of supporting money changers in any way so far. Nor does it favor usury. But folks still can choose to accept that

God will allow us to use whatever is necessary and within His will to accomplish the design that He has set up.

Although, I maintain did He set it up? Something wicked? unjust? greedy? without compassion? without respect for another man?

However, lively discussions, lucid responses, and supported positions make a great read as well as inform.

Jerry, I welcome the reponses, difference of opinions, and questions. So don't hold back, if you wish to prove your point and show your loyalty for UCC redemption--please do so. Don't sacrifice your comments and rebuttals for the sake of the forum or the site...our members will endure. They've been a part of some lively discussions all over this board, one more is nothing. We are not that weak here where one difference of opinions has ended the site. If you don't believe me, ask BillyMac.

"By the way, you can rebut my statements and answer my question(s) anytime."
I found it interesting that you instead of answering the questions that I posted in my original comments on this thread, you chose to inject commentaries on my statements; now you presume it safe to question my ability to answer the questions you posed. Answer mine and then I will consider answering yours.


Quote:
"God will allow us to use whatever is necessary and within His will to accomplish the design that He has set up.

Although, I maintain did He set it up? Something wicked? unjust? greedy? without compassion? without respect for another man? "

Jerry Says: in giving answer to your questions listed above, I will simply refer to your own faith and beliefs. I cannot answer those questions, as I was not present during the creation, nor do I presume to know the Mind of God and therefore, the testimony I have is only relative to my perspective which is based upon faith.

Furthermore; everything in existence is and was created by God. Do you deny this? This would mean that God created Lucifer.. Lucifer is the epitomy of evil as depicted by the scripture of the Holy Bible. Do you deny this? God created all of the adjective descriptions assignable to the nature of man, i.e. love, hate, greed, lust, and a myriad of other adjectives. Do you deny this?
If you deny any of these questions, then you deny that God created all that was created. If you admit to these, then you admit that God does in fact mingle in the 'bowels of money changers'. It is the essence of God that holds together the very fabric of our being. Without His presence within everything in the universe, the universe would simply vanish into the ether from whence it came. Even the most volatile and noxious poisons known to man have within them the essence of God, for without that essence, they could not exist. For your reading pleasure; http://www.pbministries.org/books/pi...overeignty.htm

God bless you and keep you.

Jerry

[Jerseee]

Very good Jerry.

Well since you have stated that I did not answer your questions--I will do so. But I thought I answered them with my rebuttal but I guess not so here it goes:

1. Yes, the Constitution, state laws and codes are man's laws. But those laws are derived from the public not the private. the UCC is derived from the private commercial rules of a handful of men to govern commerce. Our laws are based on past experiences through similar cases of people interacting with people that have had controversies settled through a third party by their consent in a public forum.

2. I have never seen the 10 Commandments in stone.

3. I cannot confirm nor deny that every existence is from God. But my faith leads to me to believe that life is through God and God alone. I hope this is going somewhere towards the UCC and God's word. Just want to see the connection.

4. According to my belief God did create Lucifer, but He also allowed free-will or this would not be so.

5. I cannot confirm nor deny that God created the attributes of man but from my beliefs--He did.

Okay, you stated, "If you deny any of these questions, then you deny that God created all that was created. If you admit to these, then you admit that God does in fact mingle in the 'bowels of money changers'."

Well this may be seemingly enough for you as cut and dry. But the clear fact still remains...even in the Bible, Jesus did not befriend money changers and they were not welcomed in His Father's house. I could not confirm nor deny most of your loaded questions but I can confirm this.....money changers were not welcomed with open arms by Jesus and if Jesus represented the Father's will then there would be honorable mention of their deeds to mankind in Jesus' time.

Also, you cannot answer those questions as well since it will put you in the same predicament that you have attmepted to put me in. Now my position or faith has not changed due to a discussion. So let's get to it.

Are you saying that God has provided a remedy through the UCC even after Jesus did what he did and said what he said about money changers?

If so, then why are folks getting no where with this alleged remedy that is approved by God?

Have you any success with this "remedy"?

I understand faith and believing in something but God works. Does the UCC work since it is an alleged remedy provided by God?

there are many testimonials here on this site that prove that the UCC redemption stuff does not work. On the other hand folks are reporting successes using lawful things. the success forum is open for UCC successes as well as courtroom and lawful successes.

There is always an opportunity to show and prove that your faith in UCC works. If it does work and you have documented proof, I have a public apology already prepared.

Great discussion.

Originally Posted by Jerseee

Very good Jerry.


Okay, you stated, "If you deny any of these questions, then you deny that God created all that was created. If you admit to these, then you admit that God does in fact mingle in the 'bowels of money changers'."

Well this may be seemingly enough for you as cut and dry. But the clear fact still remains...even in the Bible, Jesus did not befriend money changers and they were not welcomed in His Father's house. I could not confirm nor deny most of your loaded questions but I can confirm this.....money changers were not welcomed with open arms by Jesus and if Jesus represented the Father's will then there would be honorable mention of their deeds to mankind in Jesus' time..

No-one in this discussion has stated that Jesus ever welcomed or befriended the money changers in His Fathers' house. I will stipulate at this point however, that you have not considered the circumstances of what was going on nor why of those circumstances. They were not welcomed nor befriended because of the nature of the business they were conducting. The Jewish people had to perform daily sacrifices and those sacrifices sometimes consisted of various objects and animals that were to be utilized in the sacrificial ceremony. The money changers knew and realized that without those sacrifices, the prayers of the people would not be heard, therefore, the money changers sought to capitalize on the religious belief of the people by selling the items needed to execute the successful ceremony. Unfortunate for the money changers, they decided to use the Temple itself as a place of business. Jesus as Representative of God, was within the jurisdiction of His Father and righteously executed judgment on those that would turn His Fathers' personal domain into commercial benefit for a 'den of thieves'.
[/quote]

Originally Posted by Jerseee

Also, you cannot answer those questions as well since it will put you in the same predicament that you have attmepted to put me in. Now my position or faith has not changed due to a discussion. So let's get to it...

You are correct in the statement of fact regarding my lack of personal knowledge. Like yourself, my Faith is my Faith. Unfortunately, in a court of law 'faith' or a lack of 'faith' is not admissable as evidence of any purported fact. Therefore, and again like yourself, my position has not changed due to a discussion.

Originally Posted by Jerseee

Are you saying that God has provided a remedy through the UCC even after Jesus did what he did and said what he said about money changers?.

Because you are directing a question, it is apparent that I did not make my position clear in my original statement(s). God has provided everything that exists upon this creation of His (based on faith). God can utilize or permit the utilization of any of these created items to the benefit of His Will as He chooses (based on faith). Therefore, IF it is the Will of God that any one of these creations to be utilized to the benefit and Glory of His devine Will, then and under those conditions, there is a remedy in any of those created items.(based on faith)

Originally Posted by Jerseee

If so, then why are folks getting no where with this alleged remedy that is approved by God?.

Suggested probable reason(s): no faith in the working of God; using those items for a purpose that does not give Glory to God; and a host of other reasons that would lean toward and in the direction of personal greed and self glory.

Originally Posted by Jerseee

Have you any success with this "remedy"?.

You, as a moderator/owner or long-time member of this group know full well that I am a newbie to this group and it would not be an un-reasonable presumption to conclude that I have little experience with the topics relating to commerce. If I had been successful in any of the avenues expounded on herein, it would also be a reasonable presumption to conclude that I would have no reason to be here in the first place. I am here to learn and thus far, there has been little shown to learn from.

Some have shown by their own experience alleged documents that are purported to be effective, however they have not posted scanned copies of any court rulings, satisfaction of mortgage loans or personal loans, or any other document that can be traced back to the source relative to a success utilizing any of the abundant theories herein presented. In direct answer to your question... no! I have not had any success with this 'remedy' or any other remedy that relates to the use of written codes, rules, regulations, constitutions, etc. Apparently, neither has anyone else on this site.

Originally Posted by Jerseee

I understand faith and believing in something but God works. Does the UCC work since it is an alleged remedy provided by God?.

That is yet to be seen, presumably.

Originally Posted by Jerseee

there are many testimonials here on this site that prove that the UCC redemption stuff does not work. On the other hand folks are reporting successes using lawful things. the success forum is open for UCC successes as well as courtroom and lawful successes. .

I am pleased to hear that evidence of success within all of these potential remedies are allowed to be posted on this site. I find it equally interesting that there are those that offer intimidations toward any who would dare discuss the issue of redemption within this forum. So it could be concluded that unless a person is bringing forth 'proof' of success using the redemption process, discussion of the same is not welcomed. This scenario would give the appearance that those who are daring others, under threat of retaliation for even bringing the discussion forward short of 'proof' of success, are also displaying a distinct condition of tunnel vision and personal bias.

On the one hand, it is mixing God's law in a profane and perverted manner,, and on the other hand, if it can be proven that the redemption process works, then the discussion will be welcomed discussion. Does the word hypocracy start to ring in your ears?

Originally Posted by Jerseee

There is always an opportunity to show and prove that your faith in UCC works. If it does work and you have documented proof, I have a public apology already prepared..

Your above statement is not only a presumption, but is also an assumption and an outright mis-statement of fact. I have never purported to have 'faith in the UCC'. Though I do have faith in the faith-based premise that God can use the UCC to His Glory, does not give credence to your statement that I have faith in the UCC. God has used the hands of surgeons to perform what would have been considered miracles 2000 years ago, yet it is the power of the Hand of God and the Permissive Will of God that allows such things to be accomplished. Again; IF God permits a thing to be accomplished, it is accomplished by His power and by His Will, and we (the man or woman) are nothing more than the instrument of His Power and His Will.

Great discussion.[/quote]

[Jerseee]

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

No-one in this discussion has stated that Jesus ever welcomed or befriended the money changers in His Fathers' house. I will stipulate at this point however, that you have not considered the circumstances of what was going on nor why of those circumstances. They were not welcomed nor befriended because of the nature of the business they were conducting. The Jewish people had to perform daily sacrifices and those sacrifices sometimes consisted of various objects and animals that were to be utilized in the sacrificial ceremony. The money changers knew and realized that without those sacrifices, the prayers of the people would not be heard, therefore, the money changers sought to capitalize on the religious belief of the people by selling the items needed to execute the successful ceremony. Unfortunate for the money changers, they decided to use the Temple itself as a place of business. Jesus as Representative of God, was within the jurisdiction of His Father and righteously executed judgment on those that would turn His Fathers' personal domain into commercial benefit for a 'den of thieves'.

And you can't see that scenario happening in these times? Just substitute the sheep for people. Jerry, I'm here to tell you first hand and from actual experience--you, your friends and even myself are considered livestock to these people.

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

Because you are directing a question, it is apparent that I did not make my position clear in my original statement(s). God has provided everything that exists upon this creation of His (based on faith). God can utilize or permit the utilization of any of these created items to the benefit of His Will as He chooses (based on faith). Therefore, IF it is the Will of God that any one of these creations to be utilized to the benefit and Glory of His devine Will, then and under those conditions, there is a remedy in any of those created items.(based on faith)

This I can agree. But the focus is on UCC redmeption and the Word. People want results when it comes to this stuff and to play religion with banker's rules is under handed. the UCC redmeption should stand on its own and not be convoluted with the Word to give it credence.

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

Suggested probable reason(s): no faith in the working of God; using those items for a purpose that does not give Glory to God; and a host of other reasons that would lean toward and in the direction of personal greed and self glory.

Interesting you mentioned nothing about fairness, presonal freedom, and a host of other things that people want. I cannot accept that you could make a cover statement that would lead one to believe that anyone who fails at UCC redemption did it because they were greedy or vain. How about the redemption crap just doesn't work. Isn't that a verifiable (not proabable) reason?

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

You, as a moderator/owner or long-time member of this group know full well that I am a newbie to this group and it would not be an un-reasonable presumption to conclude that I have little experience with the topics relating to commerce. If I had been successful in any of the avenues expounded on herein, it would also be a reasonable presumption to conclude that I would have no reason to be here in the first place. I am here to learn and thus far, there has been little shown to learn from.

Jerry, you think too highly of me. 'Preciate it! there are a few folks here that have successes prior to joining this site so a newbie is only in reference to your posting numbers. I post from my experience and studies. I provide documents to support my findings when asked a question. I provide refernce points for members from my studies to assist them. I earned credibility prior to becoming a moderator. I have assisted many with thinking a certain way to achieve the desired results they strive for. Some folks are still fighting long battles and some have had very quick successes due to a little guidance from me and a lot of hard work on their part. A team effort. So this discussion is not predicated on my position as a moderator. This is about UCC redemption and its failure to produce the results it promises. I do nto consider you a newbie to personal freedom. But if you consider yourself a newbie, how is that you have faith in something that has proven to be more unsuccessful than successful?

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

Some have shown by their own experience alleged documents that are purported to be effective, however they have not posted scanned copies of any court rulings, satisfaction of mortgage loans or personal loans, or any other document that can be traced back to the source relative to a success utilizing any of the abundant theories herein presented. In direct answer to your question... no! I have not had any success with this 'remedy' or any other remedy that relates to the use of written codes, rules, regulations, constitutions, etc. Apparently, neither has anyone else on this site.

Well if they can't provide you or anyone with conclusive proof--its just word of mouth. Anything filed with the court is public and accessible. If folks are getting private remedy with closed door deals, where is the honor in that?

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

I am pleased to hear that evidence of success within all of these potential remedies are allowed to be posted on this site. I find it equally interesting that there are those that offer intimidations toward any who would dare discuss the issue of redemption within this forum. So it could be concluded that unless a person is bringing forth 'proof' of success using the redemption process, discussion of the same is not welcomed. This scenario would give the appearance that those who are daring others, under threat of retaliation for even bringing the discussion forward short of 'proof' of success, are also displaying a distinct condition of tunnel vision and personal bias.

Jerry, if it is proven to work--it will work. But intimidation is not what is preventing folks from proving that UCC redemption works. There is no threat duress or coercion here. People want results and they want what works. What I find interesting is that UCC redemption crap will charge you and me out the wahzoo for documents and processes but doesn't teach a thing. Here on this site, SJ has provided a means to relay and share public information at no cost. So what weighs more, an unsuccessful process that takes money away from the poor; or a free site with real time help and assistance that gets results lawfully and offers proof of successes? If this is tunnel vision, I hope you get it as well. I never hope you use UCC redmeption and find yourself up a creek. Many have used that crap and then they try to come back to lawful things and it just doesn't work and its too late. Their left out to dry and even then, we still gather around here to give viable options to their situation. And the poor persecuted redemptionist who can't catch a break anywhere they go, is a tired and lame way to get someone to believe in a process. So to play a role of martyr is one of the very tactics that UCC redemptionists use. This is not a pity party and folks want results--not sotries of someone they never heard of or met. the only fear that UCC redemptionists have is fear that they will be exposed as frauds and that their scheme does not work. You cannot even prove it works but you apparently are supporting it. I'm just a little perplexed about that.

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

On the one hand, it is mixing God's law in a profane and perverted manner,, and on the other hand, if it can be proven that the redemption process works, then the discussion will be welcomed discussion. Does the word hypocracy start to ring in your ears?

This site is not tyranically operated. A public apology is not beneath me if I am wrong. But I know I am not. I have done my research well enough to know better. You are free to post your position on any matter and it does not have to be accepted by all but it is welcomed. There is nothing hypocritical about free speech. There is something hypocritical and dubious about a process that depends on your ability to pay and the Word of God. If it cannot stand on its own, you should question it.

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

Your above statement is not only a presumption, but is also an assumption and an outright mis-statement of fact. I have never purported to have 'faith in the UCC'. Though I do have faith in the faith-based premise that God can use the UCC to His Glory, does not give credence to your statement that I have faith in the UCC. God has used the hands of surgeons to perform what would have been considered miracles 2000 years ago, yet it is the power of the Hand of God and the Permissive Will of God that allows such things to be accomplished. Again; IF God permits a thing to be accomplished, it is accomplished by His power and by His Will, and we (the man or woman) are nothing more than the instrument of His Power and His Will.

Well Jerry I tell ya what, I can't understand how you can support and defend a process that you have no success or experience with. Nor can I fathom that as an obvious sheep of the Almighty, you would allow something that has a bad track record and is not favored by the Word--to even entertain the idea of supporting such a thing. THis process has more failures than successes but yet, you are here aligning yourself with it and seemingly defending it through the same tactical actions of some of the Gurus--through the Bible and the faith of the people.

In any event, good luck to you and when you get caught up in a winless situation using UCC redmeption crap--we will still be here for you. I just hope your pride does not stand in the way.

Originally Posted by Jerseee

And you can't see that scenario happening in these times? Just substitute the sheep for people. Jerry, I'm here to tell you first hand and from actual experience--you, your friends and even myself are considered livestock to these people.

Jerry Says: Are the people being used as sacrifices (literally)? Are the people requirred to purchase anything within the House of God in order for them to worship God? Your statement regarding people being considered as livestock may or may not be true. However, you are taking out of context the statements that I did make.

Originally Posted by Jerseee

This I can agree. But the focus is on UCC redmeption and the Word. People want results when it comes to this stuff and to play religion with banker's rules is under handed. the UCC redmeption should stand on its own and not be convoluted with the Word to give it credence.

Jerry Says: The same could be held true of any of the man made laws. It would be underhanded to say that the constitution or the statutes are intertwined with Gods Law. Gods' Law does not say anything about taxes, drivers licenses, permits to build a house. Yet you say that the laws as they exist are based upon Gods' Laws. Gimme a break.

Originally Posted by Jerseee

Interesting you mentioned nothing about fairness, presonal freedom, and a host of other things that people want. I cannot accept that you could make a cover statement that would lead one to believe that anyone who fails at UCC redemption did it because they were greedy or vain. How about the redemption crap just doesn't work. Isn't that a verifiable (not proabable) reason?

Jerry Says: The possibility that the redemption process may be crap has never been refuted by me. You are full of presumptions regarding things that I have not stated. If you will look again at what I DID say, you will find that I included language stipulating a 'myriad of other' reasons. Are you again presuming to know what was or what was not intended to be included in the term myriad?

Originally Posted by Jerseee

Jerry, you think too highly of me. 'Preciate it! there are a few folks here that have successes prior to joining this site so a newbie is only in reference to your posting numbers. I post from my experience and studies. I provide documents to support my findings when asked a question. I provide refernce points for members from my studies to assist them. I earned credibility prior to becoming a moderator. I have assisted many with thinking a certain way to achieve the desired results they strive for. Some folks are still fighting long battles and some have had very quick successes due to a little guidance from me and a lot of hard work on their part. A team effort. So this discussion is not predicated on my position as a moderator. This is about UCC redemption and its failure to produce the results it promises. I do nto consider you a newbie to personal freedom. But if you consider yourself a newbie, how is that you have faith in something that has proven to be more unsuccessful than successful?

Jerry Says: A newbie by definition could also include a person that has limited knowledge on a given subject.. not just relative to his/her number of postings. This conversation is about redemption v any other process. Again you make a presumption that I have "faith in something that has proven to be more unsuccessful than successful." Your words are catching you in a lot of presumptions; nearly to the point of catching you in outright lies. Again I will reiterate,,, I have never declared that I have faith in the UCC. Why do you keep attempting to put words that are not mine in my written responses?

Originally Posted by Jerseee

Well if they can't provide you or anyone with conclusive proof--its just word of mouth. Anything filed with the court is public and accessible. If folks are getting private remedy with closed door deals, where is the honor in that?

Jerry Says: You feel it appropriate to attack the redemption process due to its' nature of causing a person to relieve him/her/self of some money to provide that remedy, yet you fail to realize that not all documents are available online free of cost. Most court facilities (at least here in florida) cost out the ying yang to get copies of documents. So where is the honor of posting a speculative win on a given process if it is going to cost a person to view proof of said win?

Originally Posted by Jerseee

Jerry, if it is proven to work--it will work. But intimidation is not what is preventing folks from proving that UCC redemption works. There is no threat duress or coercion here. People want results and they want what works. What I find interesting is that UCC redemption crap will charge you and me out the wahzoo for documents and processes but doesn't teach a thing. Here on this site, SJ has provided a means to relay and share public information at no cost. So what weighs more, an unsuccessful process that takes money away from the poor; or a free site with real time help and assistance that gets results lawfully and offers proof of successes? If this is tunnel vision, I hope you get it as well. I never hope you use UCC redmeption and find yourself up a creek. Many have used that crap and then they try to come back to lawful things and it just doesn't work and its too late. Their left out to dry and even then, we still gather around here to give viable options to their situation. And the poor persecuted redemptionist who can't catch a break anywhere they go, is a tired and lame way to get someone to believe in a process. So to play a role of martyr is one of the very tactics that UCC redemptionists use. This is not a pity party and folks want results--not sotries of someone they never heard of or met. the only fear that UCC redemptionists have is fear that they will be exposed as frauds and that their scheme does not work. You cannot even prove it works but you apparently are supporting it. I'm just a little perplexed about that.

Jerry Says: Allow me to paraphrase a statement made by someone on this thread.. 'bring on the next redemptionist'... with other words inferring a contest of wits. Could that not be considered a form of intimidation to those that are less knowledgeable on the given subjects? If you perceive my telling the truth as a tactic, then by all means it must be a tactic, however, as stated earlier, I have not filed any papers using either the redemption process of the legal process to which you hold in esteem, therefore, I do not fall in the category of redemptionist. You must be referring to someone else.
I concur, that 'folks want results'. Show me the conclusive proof of those successes to which you lay claim to exist (without costing me anything).

Originally Posted by Jerseee

This site is not tyranically operated. A public apology is not beneath me if I am wrong. But I know I am not. I have done my research well enough to know better. You are free to post your position on any matter and it does not have to be accepted by all but it is welcomed. There is nothing hypocritical about free speech. There is something hypocritical and dubious about a process that depends on your ability to pay and the Word of God. If it cannot stand on its own, you should question it.

Jerry Says: I can agree with the above with the exclusion of the next to last sentence. In two forms. 1: Even utilizing your process, you still have to pay... you have to pay for registered mail, you have to pay for duplication of documents, and probably a host of other items that are not herein mentioned. 2: The Word of God is not dubious or hypocritical.

Originally Posted by Jerseee

Well Jerry I tell ya what, I can't understand how you can support and defend a process that you have no success or experience with. Nor can I fathom that as an obvious sheep of the Almighty, you would allow something that has a bad track record and is not favored by the Word--to even entertain the idea of supporting such a thing. THis process has more failures than successes but yet, you are here aligning yourself with it and seemingly defending it through the same tactical actions of some of the Gurus--through the Bible and the faith of the people.

Jerry Says: I am not defending anything other than a persons right to choose his/her method of finding a remedy without having to submit to derision of those that oppose a particular methodology. Aligning myself? So in the exercise of free speech, if one speaks in a manner that defends another persons right of choice, then that defendor is defending the subject matter of that other persons choice? You have also stipulated that something is not "favored by the Word".. I presume you are speaking in regard to the UCC process not being 'favored by the Word'. Can you show me this in scripture?

Originally Posted by Jerseee

In any event, good luck to you and when you get caught up in a winless situation using UCC redmeption crap--we will still be here for you. I just hope your pride does not stand in the way.

"I am going to pose a question," King Milinda said to Venerable Nagasena. "Can you answer?"

"Nagasena said, "Please ask your question."

The king said, "I have already asked."

Nagasena said, "I have already answered."

The king said, "What did you answer?"

Nagasena said, "What did you ask?"

The king said, "I asked nothing."

Nagasena said, "I answered nothing."

-squirrels

[Jerseee]

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

Jerry Says: Are the people being used as sacrifices (literally)? Are the people requirred to purchase anything within the House of God in order for them to worship God? Your statement regarding people being considered as livestock may or may not be true. However, you are taking out of context the statements that I did make.

Obviously you have never served your country in a time of war. Bodies are being counted daily in Baghdad and I was there to see them tagged with numbers not names. They go into a steel suitcase and are shipped back to the states. People are forsaking their own currencies to have the dollar. You need poor people to have rich ones. Just as a farmer needs livestock to make a profit.

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

Jerry Says: The same could be held true of any of the man made laws. It would be underhanded to say that the constitution or the statutes are intertwined with Gods Law. Gods' Law does not say anything about taxes, drivers licenses, permits to build a house. Yet you say that the laws as they exist are based upon Gods' Laws. Gimme a break.

Point made--you have your break. Read the whole declaration of Independence please.

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

Jerry Says: The possibility that the redemption process may be crap has never been refuted by me. You are full of presumptions regarding things that I have not stated. If you will look again at what I DID say, you will find that I included language stipulating a 'myriad of other' reasons. Are you again presuming to know what was or what was not intended to be included in the term myriad?

When you are defending something without reason, what else am I left with? I'm not challenging faith or knowledge level---I'm challenging a process in which you are vigorously defending by way of scripture. Now if you are strictly talking religion--you have the wrong person and the wrong room.

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

Jerry Says: A newbie by definition could also include a person that has limited knowledge on a given subject.. not just relative to his/her number of postings. This conversation is about redemption v any other process. Again you make a presumption that I have "faith in something that has proven to be more unsuccessful than successful." Your words are catching you in a lot of presumptions; nearly to the point of catching you in outright lies. Again I will reiterate,,, I have never declared that I have faith in the UCC. Why do you keep attempting to put words that are not mine in my written responses?

Well I have to look up the definition of a newbie since there may be a definition for it. I am not putting you to words--I'm quoting you as you wished and I am responding to your posts. If you are not defending UCC redemption--then what in the world are you talking about? You may want to check the title of the thread before posting somewhere.

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

Jerry Says: You feel it appropriate to attack the redemption process due to its' nature of causing a person to relieve him/her/self of some money to provide that remedy, yet you fail to realize that not all documents are available online free of cost. Most court facilities (at least here in florida) cost out the ying yang to get copies of documents. So where is the honor of posting a speculative win on a given process if it is going to cost a person to view proof of said win?

people like to see results not hear about them. I attack redemption and their followers because it is a flawed system and it is dragging down unsuspecting folks. And of course some things have a cost associated with them--but knowingly pushing a flawed system and not providing help when it is needed is not good business or is it fair. Go to the success stories section and the downloads section for your proof. I have provided it already.

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

Jerry Says: Allow me to paraphrase a statement made by someone on this thread.. 'bring on the next redemptionist'... with other words inferring a contest of wits. Could that not be considered a form of intimidation to those that are less knowledgeable on the given subjects? If you perceive my telling the truth as a tactic, then by all means it must be a tactic, however, as stated earlier, I have not filed any papers using either the redemption process of the legal process to which you hold in esteem, therefore, I do not fall in the category of redemptionist. You must be referring to someone else.
I concur, that 'folks want results'. Show me the conclusive proof of those successes to which you lay claim to exist (without costing me anything).

If your process is solid and verifiable--hell yeah....bring on the next redemptionist! I'll shut them down and expose them for who they are. You don't talk about successes--you show them as examples of how to do something and proof that it works. teachers do that all the time. If that intimidates them then so be it--I'm here to allow folks to have a fighting chance at personal freedom. If you want to learn--I can teach you what I know. And it will cost you nothing but your time--I never said that freedom was free. I meant the information was free.

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

Jerry Says: I can agree with the above with the exclusion of the next to last sentence. In two forms. 1: Even utilizing your process, you still have to pay... you have to pay for registered mail, you have to pay for duplication of documents, and probably a host of other items that are not herein mentioned. 2: The Word of God is not dubious or hypocritical.

Now who is putting words to whom?

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

Jerry Says: I am not defending anything other than a persons right to choose his/her method of finding a remedy without having to submit to derision of those that oppose a particular methodology. Aligning myself? So in the exercise of free speech, if one speaks in a manner that defends another persons right of choice, then that defendor is defending the subject matter of that other persons choice? You have also stipulated that something is not "favored by the Word".. I presume you are speaking in regard to the UCC process not being 'favored by the Word'. Can you show me this in scripture?

Show me where God approves of money changers then I will show where he doesn't. More loaded questions. Look Jerry, if your not defending UCC redmeption then what are you talking about? the title of the thread says it all. If you know that I am opposed to UCC stuff why are you discussing the minute things within the discussion? You are offering nothing but controversy and I am offering you a viable solution. You have added nothing but critical comments of my position and not constructive comments of UCC redemption. Are you for or against UCC redmeption? Maybe when this question is answered I can focus on the right thing since I am so presumptive. Please tell me that you support UCC redmeption so I can continue on the path I was on with you.