Abrahamic Covenant —— The Abrahamic Covenant is one of the Biblical Covenants. It appears roughly in Genesis 11:10-25:11, but these fourteen chapters should be divided into Biblical law and Biblical fact, with the understanding that a Biblical Covenant is a type of Biblical law. The offer feedback loop for the Abrahamic Covenant appears in Genesis 12:1-3, 7-8; 13:13-18; & 14:17-15:21. The Covenant, with its specific terms, appears in Genesis 17:1-27. The terms are clarified in Genesis 18:1-15; 21:1-4; & 21:9-21. The Abrahamic Covenant is a blood Covenant, as indicated in Genesis 15:9-10. It is the first local Covenant in Scripture, indicated by Genesis 17:9-10. The only Biblical law that we classify as statutory in Genesis 11:10-25:11 appears in Abraham's last will and testament, in Genesis 25:5-6. Biblical law in Genesis 11:10-25:11 that we classify as case law appears in Genesis 14:1-16; 16:6-16; 18:16-19:29; 20:1-7; & 22:1-18. Passages in Genesis 11:10-25:11 that we classify as Biblical facts appear in Genesis 11:10-29; 30-32; 12:4-6; 12:9-13:2; 13:3-12; 16:1-5; 19:30-38; 20:8-18; 21:5-8; 21:22-34; 22:19-24; 23:1-20; 24:1-67; 25:1-4; & 25:7-11. The remainder of Genesis contains Biblical law and Biblical fact pertinent to the Abrahamic Covenant, but it contains no new Covenantal terms. At best, the Biblical law in the remainder of Genesis contains statutory law that clarifies the terms of the Abrahamic Covenant. —— We believe that the terms of the global covenant are implicitly incorporated into the Abrahamic Covenant. We also believe that all subsequent blood Covenants in Scripture implicitly incorporate the terms of the Abrahamic Covenant, because each blood Covenant is essentially a set of amendments to the pre-existing, "everlasting" covenant.

absolute ownership —— Because our concept of land that is lawfully allodial is more free from encumbrances than land in conventional or feudal jurisprudence, we distinguish conventional absolute ownership from our concept of absolute ownership typographically. See the 5th Amendment (Original Intent).

absolute title —— Because our concept of land that is lawfully allodial is more free from encumbrances than land in conventional or feudal jurisprudence, we distinguish conventional absolute title from our concept of absolute title typographically. See the 5th Amendment (Original Intent).

Adamic Covenant —— The Adamic Covenant is the first in the chronological sequence of Biblical blood Covenants. It appears in Genesis 3:1-24. As a blood Covenant, it is a set of amendments to a pre-existing Covenant (the Edenic Covenant). It is global, meaning that it applies to all human beings and has a universal in personam jurisdiction. Even so, it contains no terms that demand or prescribe positive law. This Covenant therefore pertains more to understanding the basic attributes of the human condition than it does to understanding how humans should regulate one-another's behaviors. It is revealed eternal law (divine law) that pertains to the moral sphere, but not directly to the jural or ecclesiastical spheres. —— The Adamic Covenant is essentially a compact between humanity and HaSatan, with remedial amendments to the Edenic Covenant that are established by God. —— Genesis 3:1-5 is the offer feedback loop for this compact between humanity and HaSatan. Genesis 3:9-13 is God listening mercifully to the rationalizations of the humans, rather than destroying them totally as indicated in Genesis 2:17. This listening is essentially an offer feedback loop for the establishing of the Adamic blood Covenant. Genesis 3:14-15 is the penalty for HaSatan, which is a set of terms of the Adamic Covenant. Genesis 3:16 are the penalty / terms for the woman. Genesis 3:17-19 are the penalty / terms for the man. In Genesis 3:20, the man renamed the woman to indicate that all subsequent human beings would suffer the conditions of the Adamic Covenant. In Genesis 3:21, God clothes the people with the skins of dead animals, which is why this is a blood Covenant. Genesis 3:22-24 are terms that are essentially passed as penalties to all subsequent humanity.

alienate —— It's necessary to use a customized definition of alienate. This is because the legal definition pertains primarily to real property, and also because it pertains especially to transfer of property from one person to another. In keeping with the Latin etymology of the word –– which is concerned more about estrangement and less about whatever entity receives the estranged object, or how it is estranged –– we define alienate as to lose or estrange any kind of primary or secondary property, regardless of how or to whom it is estranged. We distinguish conventional alienate from our concept of alienate typographically.

analogy-of-faith hermeneutic —— During the Reformation there was an amalgamation of "Scripture, reason, the Spirit, and the conscience of the individual".[note] It resulted in a "hermeneutical slogan": "'Let your conscience be your guide, and let reason guide your conscience, confirmed by the testimony of the Spirit.'".[note] This "hermeneutical slogan" eventually morphed into what is sometimes known as the analogy-of-faith hermeneutic.[note] In this hermeneutic, "clear" passages are controls for interpreting "obscure" passages. —— What we like about this hermeneutic is its dedication to reason and conscience. What we dislike about it, among other things, is its de facto relegation of chronology to irrelevance, and its lack of application of reliable jurisprudential concepts. We believe this hermeneutic is hugely reliable for ascertaining the attributes of God. But we believe it is hugely unreliable for ascertaining the attributes of mankind, and the demands and prescriptions that God places on mankind. —— In the investigation, we contrast the analogy-of-faith hermeneutic with the face-value hermeneutic to some extent, but mostly we follow a hermeneutical agenda that attempts to take the best from each.

anarcho-capitalism —— Anarcho-capitalism is a class of social, political, legal, and economic philosophy that holds that society should and could develop based entirely on free market principles. In other words, normal functions of secular government, such as "police, legal systems, judicial services, law enforcement, prisons", etc., would, under this kind of system, develop out of consensual free market processes and relationships rather than as functions of "the State". The most prominent exponent of this philosophy is Murray Rothbard, an Austrian School economist and "libertarian". —— Quotes are from Rothbard's For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto, Chapter 12, "The Public Sector, III: Police, Law, and the Courts", pp. 219-246. This book is available on the internet at the Ludwig von Mises Institute website, For a New Liberty.

animism —— "The doctrine of the reality of souls. 1. Anthropology: (a)the view that souls are attached to all things either as their inner principle of spontaneity or activity, or as their dwellers. (b)the doctrine that Nature is inhabited by various grades of spirits. (s. Spiritism). 2. Biology, Psychology: the view that the ground of life is immaterial soul rather than the material body. 3. Metaphysics: the theory that Being is animate, living, ensouled (s. Hylozoism, Personalism, Monadism). 4. Cosmology: the view that the World and the astronomical bodies possess souls (s. World Soul)."[note] —— Belief in the Trinity, and in the trichotomy, compel belief that the universe is indeed alive, because God is immanent within it. But they also compel belief that all the happenings in the universe are providential, and are not separable from the will of the singular transcendent God. Because animism virtually never recognizes the Trinity, divine providence, the trichotomy of human perception and action, or the transcendence of God, we believe it is an inherently erroneous doctrine.

antinomian —— "1. Of or relating to the doctrine of antinomianism. 2. Opposed to or denying the fixed meaning or universal applicability of moral law"[note] —— "a member of a Christian sect which held that faith alone, not obedience to the moral law, is necessary for salvation."[note] —— "one that holds that under the gospel dispensation the moral law is of no use or obligation because faith alone is necessary to salvation"[note]

antinomianism —— "1. Theology The doctrine or belief that the Gospel frees Christians from required obedience to any law, whether scriptural, civil, or moral, and that salvation is attained solely through faith and the gift of divine grace. 2. The belief that moral laws are relative in meaning and application as opposed to fixed or universal."[note] —— "Antinomianism, meaning lawlessness, is the idea that members of a particular religious group ascribe to a theology that effectively removes any obligation to obey the laws of ethics or morality. … It comes from the Greek anti + nomia (against law) or anomia, which literally means lawlessness. … usually used in a pejorative sense"[note] —— "The term is used … to designate freedom from law or compulsion or external regulation to human living."[note]

approach —— By approach, we usually mean hermeneutic, although we might on some occasions mean exegesis.

atonement —— In its narrowest sense, atonement is the work that Meshiach did in surrendering Himself as a sacrificial lamb, dying, and paying for the sins of the elect. In a less narrow sense, it includes other things that Yeshua HaMeshiach did in His earthly life to redeem the elect. In its broadest sense, it includes all the christophanies in the "Old Testament".

Babel —— Pertaining to the Tower of Babel described in Genesis 11:1-9.

Biblical Covenant —— A formal agreement between God and creation, especially between God and human beings, as recorded in Scripture. It is a special type of b'rit. B'rit appears about 280 times in the Hebrew Bible, and it pertains to an agreement between people, or between people and God. When a b'rit is primarily between people, we call it a b'rit / syntheke because it is essentially a contract. When a b'rit is primarily between God and people, we call it a b'rit / diatheke, because God is both a party and the Author of the agreement. This latter type of b'rit is what we call a Biblical Covenant. —— There are basically six Biblical Covenants: Edenic, Adamic, Noachian, Abrahamic, Mosaic, and Messianic.[note] With the exception of the Edenic Covenant, these are all blood Covenants. They are essentially aggregate passages that are legally so important that they exist at a constitutional level of Biblical law. As such, they are controls for understanding the rest of Scripture. These Biblical Covenants build on one another chronologically. In other words, the Edenic Covenant is like the initial constitution in the Bible. Each subsequent blood Covenant is like a set of amendments to the existing constitution.

Biblical fact —— The distinction between law and fact is crucial to any jurisprudence. It's foolish to think that Biblical jurisprudence is an exception to this rule. So the distinction between Biblical law and Biblical fact is crucial to a reliable understanding of Scripture. The distinction between a Biblical fact and an ordinary fact lies in the mechanisms relied upon to establish the fact. Ordinary facts are established as true, i.e., they are verified, through physical and psychic data. In other words, the combination of reason, raw perception, and testimonies of trusted witnesses establishes what humans accept as ordinary facts. But when we use the expression, Biblical fact, we are not talking primarily about reason, raw perception, or testimonies of witnesses. Instead, we are talking about truth claims made by Scripture. Scripture does not posit such truth claims primarily as law. They are posited primarily as historical facts. —— A Biblical fact is a subset of the divine law. The distinction between Biblical law and Biblical fact is crucial to the chronological exegesis, and much less so to the topical exegeses. See Theological Background / law v fact.

Biblical law —— We see Scripture as divisible into passages that are essentially Biblical law, and passages that are essentially Biblical fact.[note] We divide Biblical law into constitutional law (composed of the Biblical Covenants), statutory law, and case law. Biblical facts contribute to the understanding of Biblical law in a manner that's analogous to the way ordinary facts contribute to a court's deciding ordinary case law (At the common law, the judge decides what laws apply to a case. The jury decides the facts of the case. If necessary, the judge massages the law in the light of the jury's decision.). So Biblical facts are an essential aspect of the divine law, but Biblical law is the divine law's control for understanding Biblical facts. The distinction between Biblical law and Biblical fact is most crucial to the chronological exegesis, and much less so to the topical exegeses. See Theological Background / law v fact.

blood Covenant —— A blood Covenant is a Biblical Covenant in which one or more animals are ritually sacrificed in a blood-letting ceremony as an offering to God, as part of the covenant's offer feedback loop. These are the blood Covenants (with some proof citations): (i)Adamic (Genesis 3:21); (ii)Noachian (Genesis 8:20); (iii)Abrahamic (Genesis 15:9-10); (iv)Mosaic (Exodus 12:1-7); (v)Messianic (Matthew 27:34-44; John 1:29). —— There are other Biblical Covenants that are not blood Covenants: Edenic Covenant (Genesis 1-2); the Covenant with Ishmael (Genesis 16:6-16); the Covenant with David (2Samuel 7:1-17); and the Covenant with Jeroboam (1Kings 11:29-39). The Edenic Covenant is exceptional because it has a legal status akin to a constitution, where the blood Covenants are akin to sets of amendments to the constitution. The other Biblical Covenants are akin to statutes and case law that implement and interpret the constitutional law. See Maxims of the Global Covenant / #26.

bloodguilt —— By bloodguilt we mean guilt for perpetrating bloodshed.

bloodshed —— This is a moniker we use to designate the underlying concept indicated in Genesis 9:6. We believe the shed blood in Genesis 9:6 should not be understood as limited to literal shed blood. This is because severe damage, even death, can be brought against a human being without the literal shedding of blood. So we believe the shed blood of Genesis 9:6 is metaphorical. We believe the underlying concept designated by the metaphor is much more complex than the literal shedding of human blood. It designates death, damage, or injury perpetrated by one person against another (including the other's property). Because threats can be so debilitating, we believe that serious threats must also be understood to be bloodshed. —— Bloodshed is a metaphorical expression that generally designates the perpetration of a delict, an act that is malum in se that results in a dead, damaged, injured, or seriously threatened party. Because serious threats that pose a clear and present danger are inherently debilitating, we consider them a form of damage and injury. Legal actions that derive from bloodshed are always ex delicto. We define delict and bloodshed as being identical. Bloodshed is trespass against someone's ownership of his/her physical body and/or other physical property, where such ownership is a right (not merely a contractual privilege), and where such trespass is a delict, and where such trespass is malum in se. The range of punishments and remedies for bloodshed are retribution, restitution, and injunction. Delicts can either be gross (meaning that they're penalized with retribution) or subtle (meaning that they're penalized with restitution or injunction). —— In addition to bloodshed perpetrated by non-governmental authorities, we consider slavery, all forms of legalized involuntary servitude, and all violations of property rights that are endorsed or protected by governmental authorities, to be institutionalized bloodshed –– bloodshed perpetrated under color of law. —— See (i)Maxims of the Global Covenant / #30; (ii)Article I § 2 cl 3 / slavery; (iii)Article III § 2 cl 1 (Unconscionable Contracts) / suicide; and (iv)Article III § 2 cl 1 (Injunctions) / more bloodshed.

bloodshed police power —— According to our understanding of the global covenant, there is a radical distinction between two different types of police power: (i) police power that enforces laws against bloodshed, and (ii) police powers that "regulate" everything else. We call the first type of police power, bloodshed police power. See 10th Amendment / police power.

born again —— Same as regeneration.

calling —— Scripture makes it clear that God calls people to be and do certain things (Romans 11:29; 1Corinthians 7:20; Ephesians 1:18; Philippians 3:14; 2Timothy 1:8-11; etc.). Given our analyses and definitions of rights, privileges, and disabilities, it's reasonable to believe that such a calling is a feature of each such person's set of privileges and disabilities. We mark this feature as a calling.

canon —— "The canon of Scripture is the list of all the books that belong in the Bible."[note] —— For more information about what we agree is the reliable canon, and therefore divine law, see Systematic Theology, pp. 54-68.

chance —— "1. Property of being undetermined. 2. Property of being predictable according to the laws of probability."[note] —— Anyone who believes that God is sovereign necessarily also believes that He is sovereign over everything that happens in time and space, and over everything that humans can choose or will. Therefore, there is no such thing as chance in the realm of eternal law: (i)Everything is determined by God's will; and (ii)God has no need for "laws of probability" because everything happens according to His sovereign will. But human perception is extremely fallible, and it's often extremely difficult for us to understand how things work. So we use "laws of probability" as mental constructs to help us to understand. As long as we understand that chance exists only in the human mind, but not in nature, it is useful in helping us to grasp the "laws of nature", our understanding of which is a subset of natural law. But whenever we believe that chance exists in nature, outside the human mind –– as is the case with most scientists and most secular humanists –– we have adopted the practical atheist's worldview. To distinguish our theologically reliable conception of chance from the secular humanist's delusional conception, we signify our conception with special typography: chance. See predestination and 1st Amendment (Secular Humanist Establishment) / chance.

Christian reconstructionism —— "Reconstructionism is a distinctive blending of certain biblical doctrines. They are (1) personal regeneration, (2) the application of biblical law to all areas of life, and (3) the advance of the already-present kingdom in history through the preaching of the gospel and the empowering of the Holy Spirit."[note] We agree with reconstructionism in many of its goals, but we have extreme differences in regard to hermeneutics and application, especially in regard to "the application of biblical law". —— See theonomic reconstructionism and "Moses' Law for Modern Government: The Intellectual and Sociological Origins of the Christian Reconstructionist Movement" (by Ligon Duncan).

christophany —— An appearance of Yeshua HaMeshiach, Jesus Christ, in the "Old Testament".

chronological approach —— God's plan for redeeming humanity (at least the elect) –– as revealed in the Bible –– sets different demands and obligations on humanity at different times, epochs, and eras in the chronological unfolding of this plan.[note] We therefore conclude that humanity changes chronologically, whereas God does not.[note] We therefore believe that it's crucial to distinguish exegeses that pertain to things that change from exegeses that pertain to things that don't. The former we call a chronological exegesis, or chronological approach. The latter we call topical exegeses. The chronological exegesis focuses most emphatically on jurisprudential issues.

chronological exegesis —— A chronological exegesis is an exegesis that uses the chronological approach within our overarching hermeneutical agenda.

collectivism —— "a political or economic theory advocating collective control esp. over production and distribution or a system marked by such control"[note] —— The Marxist system implemented in the Soviet Union is the most notorious example of a collectivist system. The collectivist conception of property and property rights is inherently opposed to the conceptions that exist in the global covenant. The collectivist conceptions lead inevitably to massive bloodshed perpetrated by government against its people, because such governments inherently neglect consent. A free market is the only kind of economic system that sufficiently regards consent.

common grace —— "Common grace is the grace of God by which he gives people innumerable blessings that are not part of salvation. The word common here means something that is common to all people and is not restricted to believers or to the elect only."[note]

commons —— The legal concept of commons is bound almost inextricably to the feudal concepts of land ownership. To extricate the concept of property that is held in common by multiple people from the feudal biases, we're left with almost no choice but to create a new moniker, commons. By commons, we mean land over which no one party has dominion, and over which many parties have a common interest. Such land generally includes wild animals, wild plants, outside air, inland waterways, oceans, and land that is held in common. —— See 1st Amendment (Emperor's "Parade of Horribles") / commons land.

compact —— A compact is essentially the same thing as a contract. But based on our reading of Scripture, we recognize two fundamental forms of such compacts, and designate them with this compact moniker. They are the jural compact and the ecclesiastical compact. The combination of these two types of compacts in a single society we call a social compact.

conscience —— By conscience we mean "1 a: the sense or consciousness of the moral goodness or blameworthiness of one's own conduct, intentions, or character together with a feeling of obligation to do right or be good b: a faculty, power, or principle enjoining good acts".[note] We mark this word with a special typographical moniker (bold-underlined) to emphasize its profound theological significance. —— The conscience operates in the moral sphere, outside the scope or purview of either the jural or ecclesiastical spheres. This is true even though these latter two spheres are subsets of the moral sphere.

consent —— It's necessary for us to use a customized definition of consent because, unlike traditional and current Anglo-American jurisprudence, we believe a lawful social compact is necessarily divided into two distinct sub-compacts that have distinct jurisdictions: the ecclesiastical compact and the jural compact. Consent is necessarily defined differently in these two compacts based on the foundational impetus behind each compact: —— (i)The impetus behind the ecclesiastical society is the gratification of myriad needs and desires through cooperation. The only way that an ecclesiastical society can procure jurisdiction over a specific human being is by that human being's prior consent, assent, or acquiescence. The ecclesiastical society's purpose is not to curb bloodshed, protecting unalienable Rights. There is no lawful mandate that forces a human being to participate. So in a lawful ecclesiastical society, there are no exceptions to the standard that no one with capacity should be forced. In a lawful ecclesiastical society, all such human interactions are consensual. —— (ii)The impetus behind the jural society is the Genesis 9:6 mandate. The jural society's purpose is to curb bloodshed, protecting unalienable Rights. In a jural society, consent about punishment is not required from someone who commits a delict. This is based on Genesis 9:6, which in essence says, "People who commit bloodshed thereby forfeit their rights commensurate with the gravity of the bloodshed. Their consent to their punishment is therefore negligible.". Since the Genesis 9:6 mandate applies to all people, it in essence mandates not only that people avoid committing bloodshed, but also that every human being is responsible for punishing those who do. So when a jural society establishes its geographical jurisdiction, all people within that jurisdiction are mandated to help in the execution of justice against perpetrators of delicts. This usually translates in practice into a non-consensual mandate to pay jural taxes and to acquiesce to jural takings. Other than these two forfeitures of consent –– (i)forfeiture by those guilty of delicts, and (ii)forfeiture to ensure execution of justice against bloodshed –– jural societies rightly run by consent in much the same way that ecclesiastical societies do. —— See Introduction-Preamble / types of consent and Article I § 8 cl 1 / types of consent.

conventional —— Something that's conventional is something that's done, or that exists, via convention, i.e., by way of "usage or custom".[note] This word has special theological significance because it is essential to a common-sense definition of status. If we start with the assumption that every human being has all the attributes of God (even omniscience and omnipotence) with many (if not most) of these attributes disabled, then every human's status is defined by that set of disabilities that they have. By common sense, these disabilities fall into two categories, natural and conventional. Natural disabilities are given by God through nature.[note] Conventional disabilities are acquired through the person's choices. Conventional disabilities can be either contractual or non-contractual. See 1st Amendment (Emperor's "Parade of Horribles") / racism.

covenant —— This moniker, covenant, refers to either the eternal covenant or the divine covenant. Which it is can be ascertained by examining the context.

Covenant —— This is the same thing as a Biblical Covenant.

covenant of grace —— When the human beings violated the Edenic Covenant, God would have been utterly justified if He had annihilated the human race. But He chose to render mercy (grace) instead of pure justice at that time. The Adamic Covenant was therefore a covenant of grace. All subsequent Biblical Covenants are also in many respects manifestations of the covenant of grace.[note]

covenant of redemption —— This covenant "is an agreement among the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, in which the Son agreed to become a man, be our representative, obey the demands of the covenant of works on our behalf, and pay the penalty for sin, which we deserved."[note]

covenant of works —— This is the term used in traditional theology for the covenant that existed between mankind and God in the garden of Eden. It is largely equivalent to what we call the Edenic Covenant.[note]

covenant theology —— "Covenant theology believes that God has structured his relationship with humanity by covenants rather than dispensations." —— Quote is from the Desiring God website.

creation —— The universe, including all objects and entities. This moniker indicates that according to Scripture, the universe did not come into existence by chance, but was clearly created by God (Genesis 1-2).

Davidic Covenant —— The Covenant that appears in 2Samuel 7:4-17.

decretive will —— God decreed "before the creation of the world" everything that comes to pass. God's "providential actions are the outworking of the eternal decrees that he made long ago".[note] God's choice to make these "eternal decrees"is what we call His decretive will, or will of decree.

deism —— "[T]he view that God has no immediate relation with the world; God indeed is responsible for the world but for reasons unknown or conjectured God has no commerce with it; accordingly, the supplications and hopes of men are illusory and fruitless. This doctrine is sometimes referred to as the 'absentee landlord' view."[note]

delict —— An act that is malum in se which results in a dead, damaged, or injured human being, or which makes a serious and obvious threat to do the same. We distinguish delict from delict because delict is defined as violation of rights, which are by definition property rights, and which derive from the fact that all human beings are created in the image of God (Genesis 1:26,27; 9:6). Delict is a secular expression that does not have the same theological foundations. —— In our parlance, a delict is essentially the same thing as bloodshed.

delict (gross) —— We distinguish two overarching types of delicts –– gross and subtle –– based on the type of penalty to be brought to bear against the perpetrator. Actions against gross delicts are usually brought by the jural society, rather than by citizens.[note] The penalty against a gross delict is usually retribution. —— We call this type of delict gross because it conforms so obviously to the Genesis 9:6 mandate against bloodshed. See Maxims of the Global Covenant / #1 and Article I § 8 cl 1 / gross v. subtle.

delict (subtle) —— We distinguish two overarching types of delicts –– gross and subtle –– based on the type of penalty to be brought to bear against the perpetrator. Actions against subtle delicts are usually brought by citizens (parties to the jural compact who are not officials of the jural society), rather than by the jural society per se.[note] Penalties against perpetrators of subtle delicts are usually restitution and/or injunction. If the delict is in process, meaning that further damage is threatened, then at least part of the remedy is injunctive. If there is a dead, damaged, or injured person, and further damage is not being threatened, then injunction is not called for, even though restitution is. —— We call this type of delict subtle because it's not so obviously derived from Genesis 9:6. But we believe that justice demands that we include subtle delicts, as included in our understanding of the Genesis 9:6 mandate against bloodshed. See Maxims of the Global Covenant / #1 and Article I § 8 cl 1 / gross v. subtle.

delictual —— Of, relating to, or derived from a delict.

deluge —— The global flood described in Genesis 6-9.

denizen —— A person natural born in a country who has not consented or acquiesced to citizenship status. —— It's necessary to use this customized definition of "denizen" because we find nothing in the American legal lexicon that is equivalent. The "primary, but obsolete" definition of denizen turns the natural born person automatically into a subject. The more modern definition, as "one holding a middle state between an alien and a natural born subject" is equally inappropriate. —— See denizen, subject, and Article I § 8 cl 4 / denizen.

dichotomy —— Ordinarily, (i)"The view that man is made of three parts (body, soul, and spirit) is called trichotomy."; (ii)"The view that man is made up of two parts (body and soul/spirit) is called dichotomy."; and (iii)"The view that man is only one element, and that his body is the person, is called monism.".[note] —— Along with all reliable theologies, we believe that God is both transcendent and immanent. A topical approach to Scripture regarding the nature of God leads us to this conclusion. But we're convinced that a topical approach to understanding the basic nature of human beings fails to yield reliable results. Most analogy-of-faith theologies that are otherwise reliable conclude that man is basically a dichotomy. They make this conclusion because "the usage of biblical words translated 'soul' (Heb. nephesh and Gk. psyche) and 'spirit' (Heb. ruach and Gk. pneuma)" are often "used interchangeably".[note] So they conclude that mankind are made of two parts, "body and soul/spirit". We agree with believers in dichotomy that the usage of these biblical words is ambiguous. Even so, we believe that there is plenty of conceptual evidence in Scripture to support our belief that human beings are a monism in our created (and resurrected) nature, and a trichotomy in our fallen nature. It's essential to notice that our definition of monism is radically different from most theologies and philosophies. This is because deciphering these issues based on "element[s]" is inherently misleading. These issues need to revolve instead around questions of (i)What can human beings perceive?, and (ii)Can human beings act in these fields of perception? See Spiritual, psychic, and physical.

disability —— We claim that the status of every human being is determined by their disabilities. We claim this because the naturalistic view of humanity is that each human has developed from rudimentary elements (like dirt) through a series of chance chemical reactions. In contrast to this naturalistic view, the Biblical view holds that God created humanity from the dust of the earth (Genesis 1-2) and endowed each human with the "image of God" (Genesis 1:26,27; 9:6). So rather than define the human status in terms of abilities that come from dirt, we define the human status as disabilities that are given by God. Every human is disabled from being omnipotent and omniscient. Males are disabled from being female, and females are disabled from being male. So status is the combination of rights, which are the same in aggregate for all humans, and disabilities, which are unique in aggregate for every human. So disabilities are more crucial to understanding human status than abilities. Disabilities exist in two kinds: natural and conventional, by common sense.

disability (contractual conventional) —— Conventional disabilities exist in two kinds: contractual and non-contractual. Contractual disabilities are always conventional, by common sense. Contractual disabilities are always acquired through consent. Because some obligations of the divine covenant transcend human choice (like being made male or female), while others do not, some human obligations of the divine covenant are not contractual disabilities, while others are (like avoiding consumption of animal blood under the Noachian Covenant, Genesis 9:4).

disability (conventional) —— A conventional disability is one acquired conventionally. Conventional disabilities are divided into two kinds: conventional disability (contractual) and conventional disability (non-contractual).

disability (natural) —— According to common sense, disabilities exist in two kinds: natural and conventional. God gives natural disabilities, regardless of human choice. Example: Humans have no natural ability to fly; so we all have a natural disability in this regard.

disability (non-contractual conventional) —— Conventional disabilities exist in two kinds: contractual and non-contractual. A non-contractual conventional disability is a disability acquired through custom and usage that does not arise out of a contractual obligation. For example, alcoholism is acquired through custom and usage (i.e., repetitious consumption), but it does not arise out of contractual obligations.

dispensationalism —— A Bible-based theology that holds, among other things, that God structures "His relationship with mankind through several stages of revelation which mark off different dispensations, or stewardship arrangements". Dispensationalism "holds to a literal interpretation of Scripture". —— Quotes are of the Desiring God website.

divine covenant —— A divine covenant is the single covenant that exists between God and a given group of people, at any given point in the Biblical chronology. It is that part of Scripture that pertains to that group. For example, after the Israelites had escaped from Egyptian slavery and had settled in the "promised land", all such Israelites were party to the Edenic, Adamic, Noachian, Abrahamic, and Mosaic Covenants, where the Adamic, Noachian, Abrahamic, and Mosaic Covenants are essentially sets of amendments to the existing constitution, the Edenic Covenant. Therefore, the divine covenant that had in personam jurisdiction over these Israelites at this time was this particular aggregate of Biblical Covenants. At the same time in history, numerous nations existed that had no rigorous cognition of these Covenants. Nevertheless, because the Edenic, Adamic, and Noachian Covenants are global (but the Abrahamic and Mosaic are not), these global Covenants aggregated into the divine covenant that had in personam jurisdiction over all these other peoples and nations. So a divine covenant is that part of divine law, and that accumulation of Biblical Covenants, that pertains to a specific set of people. —— If it's understood that different parts of the divine law have different in personam jurisdictions, then it's safe to assume that the entire canon of Scripture is a single covenant, what we can call the divine covenant, in this more general sense of the term. See Maxims of the Global Covenant / #29.

divine law —— Because we think it unwise to break with tradition without justification, we make a few clear concessions to tradition. One such concession is the usage of "divine law" to signify the Bible as a whole, especially what we recognize as being the canon. Divine law is the Holy Scriptures as contained in the orthodox (i.e., righteous) Christian canon. See Theological Background / types of law.

divine providence —— We believe that God is both transcendent (meaning that He "is far 'above' the creation in the sense that he is greater than the creation and he is independent of it")[note] and immanent (meaning that He continues to be involved in creation).[note] "Though the term providence is not found in Scripture, it has been traditionally used to summarize God's ongoing relationship to his creation."[note] By adopting this doctrine, we avoid four doctrines that are clearly wrong according to Scripture: deism, pantheism, chance (or randomness –– See chance.), and fatalism (or determinism). We define divine providence as follows: "God is continually involved with all created things in such a way that he (1)keeps them existing and maintaining the properties with which he created them; (2)cooperates with created things in every action, directing their distinctive properties to cause them to act as they do; and (3)directs them to fulfill his purposes.".[note]

ecclesiastical —— Pertains to an ecclesiastical compact.

ecclesiastical compact —— The use of "ecclesiastical" in this expression should not be confused with the normal legal usage, which pertains "to anything belonging to or set apart for the church" (ecclesiastical).[note] This is because we define "church" and religion much more broadly than is normal in common parlance or legal jargon. We base our use of "ecclesiastical" on the general definition of ecclesia, "An assembly".[note] But an ecclesiastical compact is more than a mere assembly. It is the aggregation or coalescence of all the agreements, gifts, and contracts of an assembly or society into a single system or network of such agreements, gifts, and contracts. An ecclesiastical compact is this system or network conceptualized as a single compact. But this single compact excludes whatever agreements, gifts, and contracts are fundamental to the existence of a jural compact. The aggregation of all agreements, gifts, and contracts in a whole society, including both ecclesiastical and jural compacts, is what we call a social compact. So an ecclesiastical compact is the social compact minus the jural compact. See Maxims of the Global Covenant / #3.

ecclesiastical compact (geographical jurisdiction of) —— Because an ecclesiastical compact is by definition an umbrella contract or agreement that aggregates contracts and agreements in a society, such a compact can only have geographical jurisdiction over geographical territory that is implicitly or explicitly included in such contracts or agreements, or specifically in the ecclesiastical compact. So such geographical territory is the geographical jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical compact. See Maxims of the Global Covenant / #8.

ecclesiastical compact (in personam jurisdiction of) —— Every ecclesiastical compact has in personam jurisdiction over parties to such compact, meaning anyone who is party to an agreement or contract that subtends this umbrella compact. See Maxims of the Global Covenant / #6.

ecclesiastical compact (subject matter jurisdiction of) —— Every ecclesiastical compact has subject matter jurisdiction only over contracts that subtend the ecclesiastical compact. This is true by common sense, and by definition of