Our Purpose:

The overriding purpose of this multimedia work is to glorify the God of the Judaeo-Christian Bible by stimulating the formation of interdenominational / inter-religious jural societies and Christian ecclesiastical societies, where these societies fully understand and implement the jurisdictional distinctions between jural and ecclesiastical compacts. To be more specific, we are a para-church ministry that is Christian in origins. Our aim is two-fold: (i)development, operation, and maintenance of jural societies that are compliant with the guidelines defined in this inventory; (ii)development of ecclesiastical societies that are appended to such compliant jural societies to form social compacts. The defining characteristic of such jural societies is NOT that they are Christian, but that they recognize and comply with the positive law prescribed by the global covenant. The defining characteristic of such ecclesiastical societies is NOT that they are Christian, but that they have allegiance to such a jural society. This para-church ministry is interdenominational and even inter-religious in its implementation; even though it is Christian in its foundations. Because of our Christian foundations –– even though we are open to helping in the formation of inter-religious jural societies –– our focus is on helping Christians to form jural societies. Because of our Christian foundations –– even though we are open to helping non-Christian ecclesiastical societies to form allegiances with lawful jural societies –– our focus is on helping Christian ecclesiastical societies to form such allegiances.

We do NOT see political activism –– or activism of any other kind within the secular society –– as being primary. If political activism happens as a by-product of our primary purpose, that's great. But such activism is NOT our primary purpose. Profiting and defending the Church and Kingdom of Jesus Christ is our primary purpose. Continuing and expanding the education process, and doing the legal and theological research that is essential to advancing this peaceful revolution, are our primary purposes, and of course, these demand financial resources. These projects proceed primarily through donations from people who want this work to continue posthaste. But we also trade hardcopy of this unpublished work on a pay-as-you're-able basis to anyone willing to purchase through private contract.

We believe that Scripture mandates the compact theory of government to which we adhere. We believe that government having these basic jurisdictional principles is implied in law in every society, even if there is little or no evidence of such government in a given society. We believe that there are two, and only two, sources of lawful legal action: delicts and contracts. If a nexus between one of these two lawful motives for legal action, and the legal action itself, cannot be found, then the legal action is being perpetrated under color of law. In other words, wherever a delict or a violation of a contract exists, it is stimulus for a legal action. The lawful response to such a stimulus is a proportional action, either ex delicto or ex contractu. By following the hermeneutic sketched in the prolegomenon, we find these actions grounded in Scripture, and we find these actions to be the lawful foundation upon which all lawful governments are grounded. Because the existence of such compactual government is globally implied in law, government formed largely through contracts, agreements, and consent is globally implied in law. Because conditions implied in law are normal in contract law, conditions implied in law are normal in any government formed by way of these basic jurisdictional principles. One obvious condition implied in law for any government is that if government fails to operate by these basic jurisdictional principles, the obligations owed to such government by ordinary people are discharged without performance, commensurate with governmental deviation from these basic jurisdictional principles. Because the final say over whether a given natural person will acquiesce to governmental pressures or not, is held by the given natural person, and not by anyone else, it's implied in law that for every natural person over whom lawful government presumes to have jurisdiction, an artificial person exists.[note] This artificial person is a straw man, created by government to interface with the natural person. Because the natural person is the only person who is ultimately lawfully entitled to control the straw man, and because of the theological nature of the compacts that create the straw man, we mark the straw man with a special definition, indicated by strawman.

Secular governments generally demand that each natural person stand as surety for the strawman that the administrative state creates, and such secular governments typically assume that no contractual nexus exists, but that your consent is negligible, while your cooperation is mandatory. But this kind of assumption is inherently tyrannical. Secular officials have put themselves outside the realm of lawful government by making such assumptions. But we believe that this strawman doesn't derive only from the development of the administrative / Welfare state beginning in the 1930s. We believe that as long as governments have existed, the strawman has existed implied in law for each natural person presumably governed by such governments. The strawman has existed for every flesh-and-blood human being who has lived under the secular governments of this nation, from its inception.

How do we stay legal and lawful under the present secular governments?

In a government based on consent, government has no need to impose obligations that do not conform to the consent rule, on anyone. Even so, obligations always exist under all social compacts. To distinguish the obligations that do not conform to the consent rule, from those that DO conform to it, we find it necessary to distinguish obligations that government imposes on the strawman into two basic categories: (i)obligations that are lawful, and for which the natural person is lawfully obligated to stand as surety for strawman's performance; (ii)obligations that are unlawful, and for which the natural person is not lawfully obligated to stand as surety for strawman's performance. Lawful government has the privilege of acknowledging the existence of natural persons, and creating and destroying strawmen, and imposing consensual obligations thereon. But such government has no right or privilege to impose non-consensual obligations.

Although this nation started well –– being based on largely reliable social contract principles from people like Locke and Montesquieu, as well as on much that was reliable in the common law expounded by Blackstone –– the country early fell into a malicious pattern. The nation's foundational jurisprudence was, and is, based excessively on feudal conceptions of real property, personal property, property rights, taxation, what is strictly private versus what is rightly public, the powers of government relative to the rights of "the people", the duties that ordinary people owe to ruling authorities, etc. Until now, the distinction between What is God's? and What is Caesar's? has not been reliably parsed. Rather than use reliable readings of Scripture and/or reliable principles expounded by Locke, Montesquieu, and company, to question misconceptions, judges have accepted feudal misconceptions and applied them in real cases. Then subsequent opinions in similar cases have followed the lead of ill-conceived precedent. Bad premises lead to bad conclusions. In the name of stare decisis –– for over 210 years –– American jurisprudence has evolved into a multitude of judges (and the police who follow their lead) following a mob in doing evil (Exodus 23:2). We refuse to be a part of this mob. At every opportunity, we refuse –– and will continue to refuse –– to stand as surety for ill-conceived obligations that they impose on the strawman. If they want to follow a mob in doing evil, then they do so at their own eternal peril. We will not encourage it.

All our interactions with all people, all persons, all public and private corporations, are preferably voluntary and consensual in nature. It is undeniable that the secular governments of the united States (including the general government and the State and local entities) habitually create a strawman for every denizen born within their geographical jurisdiction. It's undeniable that agencies of such secular governments habitually expect such denizens to stand as surety for the strawman. We do our best to work within this system for the sake of staying legal. But if we can't find a lawful way to be legal, we'll choose lawful over legal, and we'll thereby refuse to stand as surety for the strawman even if it means breaking the secular law.

In the unlawful obligations imposed on the strawman by secular governments and their agents, advocates, accomplices, and collaborators, such officers, agents, advocates, collaborators, etc., use coercion, fraud, misrepresentation, intimidation, misinformation, etc., to convince the flesh-and-blood human being to stand as surety for the artificial person. Since it's obvious that cooperation from a flesh-and-blood human being –– by the latter's standing as surety for such strawman –– is valuable to these agents of the mega-state, it's reasonable to assume that such cooperation has commercial value. All documentary evidence of such cooperation is therefore potentially commercial instruments under the Uniform Commercial Code (the UCC has been adopted as statutes in all States[note]). Such documents include birth certificates, marriage licenses, driver's licenses, hunting and fishing licenses, occupational and vocational licenses, various kinds of permits, etc., ad nauseum. Since they have commercial value, they can be treated as commercial documents that are owned by the strawman. Since the flesh-and-blood human is the lawful owner of such documents, flesh-and-blood human can lawfully take possession and control of them, as a bailor who has in essence allowed the mega-state to be a bailee of such documents, thereby terminating the bailment.

Our purpose is to continue this educational process, continue this legal and theological research, and continue advancing this peaceful (we hope) revolution, as though walking through this minefield created by the mega-state, without getting blown up. We hope that eventually this minefield will be disarmed. For every denizen or citizen who lives in the united States, secular governments and the quasi-governmental entities that are their partners in crime –– like banks and other corporations –– routinely create and retain legal documents that have the denizen / citizen's name on them. Consider the birth certificate. Secular governments have two legal claims to any given birth certificate, one being lawful and the other not: (i)A secular government has a lawful and reasonable excuse to track births through birth certificates in order to evidence the existence of denizens within its geographical jurisdiction. (ii)Rather than using birth certificates strictly to track what denizens were born in the given geographical jurisdiction, secular governments routinely use birth certificates as a starting place for imposing non-consensual citizenship obligations. They do this via the 14^th Amendment: "All persons born … in the United States … are citizens". They use birth certificates to extend unlawful police powers –– secular social compacts in essence claiming religious police powers. —— Both of these may be legal. Only one is lawful. Practically every certificate, document, instrument, or whatever that secular governments use to impose obligations on strawman have the same characteristics. They are (i)useful, reasonable, and lawful in some respects; (ii)odious and unlawful in most respects; and (iii)potentially commercial instruments under any reasonable reading of the UCC.

In tip-toeing through this mine field, we intend to stay focused on our purpose and objective by remembering a cry that was common during the War for Independence: "No king but King Jesus!". When we say this, we're echoing the fervent desire of saints throughout history, especially during the Reformation, that God be glorified, and the state be eliminated as any kind of surrogate therefor. Pertinent to this endeavor, we recall that during the Reformation, in Switzerland, a Protestant theologian named Thomas Erastus became involved in a controversy over excommunication. He believed that excommunication should not be left in the hands of the Church, but should remain in the hands of the state. His writings became popular later in the English Reformation, and his name has since been associated with a specific legal doctrine. The doctrine "that offenses against religion and morality should be punished by the civil power, and not by the censures of the church or by excommunication", is called Erastianism.[note] This is very pertinent to us today because in essence, all but a very small fragment of the Christian Church in America has become Erastian, meaning that the visible Church largely abdicates its duties and turns them over to secular authorities. This is evidenced by the fact that virtually all churches are 26 USC § 501(c)(3). This mass movement towards Erastianism has been driven largely by unscrupulous attorneys who know that they cannot make money off churches that are outside the jurisdictions of the secular governments. So they pretend to be Christians, but are really Erastians who mask their presumption with weak-minded readings of passages like Romans 13:1-7. They use their legal credentials to lead Christian churches by the nose into bondage to the secular state. Our purpose is to avoid this, and to encourage others to do likewise.

Nature of our Organization:

We do not call ourselves a "non-profit" or "not-for-profit" organization. We exist, by the grace of God, to profit and prosper the Church of Jesus Christ. We believe that claiming to be a non-profit or not-for-profit organization is equivalent to claiming to be the servant that buries his talent (Matthew 25:14-30). We do not exist for the profit of the secular state. We exist for the profit of the Church and Kingdom of Jesus Christ. Any benefit that may befall the secular state by way of this ministry is purely secondary, tertiary, n-ary, coincidental, accidental, or fortuitous to them.[note] We do not exist to profit them, or to profit what they deem to be public.

Because of our firm belief in the doctrine of the "separation of church and state" –– the parameters of which appear throughout this inventory –– we believe that the internal structure of our organization is purely private. We intend not to risk violation of our unalienable Right to contract by publishing private, proprietary information to governmental authorities who are prone to abuse such information. —— We have no king but King Jesus. —— In a society in which governmental powers derive from "the consent of the governed", governmental authorities are inherently servants to the people, not jack-booted thugs who claim an unlimited right to know and do whatever they want. We intentionally avoid encouraging the latter.

We remain unincorporated not because there is something inherently evil about corporations. In its most rudimentary conception, a corporation is simply a contract that defines a system of relationships, where this contract is typically intended by the parties to have a perpetual existence. But even during Blackstone's time, "The founder of all corporations in the strictest and original sense is the king alone".[note] We have no king but King Jesus, and we'll submit ourselves to existing governments only to the extent that they have a reliable commitment to being lawful. We have a right to contract that is limited only by our obligation to avoid perpetrating delicts against other people.[note] We believe that if we sought incorporation, we would be submitting ourselves to being the creation of secular governments, thereby establishing the secular mega-state as the sovereign over our organization, rather than demanding that King Jesus alone be our sovereign. Churches who have neglected this caution and have incorporated, have become creations of the state, and have ceased to be free contractual organizations. They have neglected the facts clearly stated in Hale v. Henkel:

The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the state or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him. He owes no such duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the state, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution. Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights. Upon the other hand, the corporation is a creature of the state. It is presumed to be incorporated for the benefit of the public. It receives certain special privileges and franchises, and holds them subject to the laws of the state and the limitations of its charter. Its powers are limited by law. It can make no contract not authorized by its charter.

We are a corporation in the rudimentary sense, but not in the customary legal sense. Because we are a religious organization that refuses to incorporate, some people might consider us to be an "unincorporated association". But to whatever degree being an "unincorporated association" might be construed as having a status of unwarranted surety for the strawman, we are not an "unincorporated association" either. The nature of this contract is nobody else's business, unless we choose to make it so. We refuse on moral and religious grounds to register with the government. We refuse on moral and religious grounds to incorporate. We refuse on moral and religious grounds to petition the government for recognition of our existence.

Erastian lawyers claim that Christians only have two choices. Every church must either incorporate, or it must exist as an "unincorporated association". We stand on our unalienable Right to contract, and we refuse to receive either label. The Church of Jesus Christ existed before the government was created. It will exist after the government goes away. As a fellowship within the universal Church, we intend for our organization to have the same kind of perpetual existence. We'll exist until Jesus returns, or until God sovereignly mandates that we disband.

The 1st Amendment implicitly mandates that churches are totally outside the scope of powers of the Internal Revenue Service, unless they deliberately volunteer themselves into such jurisdiction. We intend to maintain and enforce this non-secular status by whatever mechanisms are available to us. We intend to make admissions and confessions to secular entities minimally, only as prudence allows.

Tax Status of our Organization:

The Internal Revenue Code has jurisdiction only over the District of Columbia, federal territories, federal enclaves, people in foreign countries who have specific financial connections to this country, and people within the 50 States who volunteer for such jurisdiction. The same is true for organizations. Since we, as an organization, are not in D.C., federal territories or enclaves, and since we emphatically refuse to volunteer, the IRS has no jurisdiction over us. As long as the 10th Amendment has not been explicitly repealed by another amendment, this is a legal fact that even the IRS cannot evade. One of the reasons few people understand that this is an unavoidable jurisdictional fact, is because practically all the people in the 50 States have volunteered to be under the IRS's jurisdiction. When people sign up for Social Security, they sign up for federal welfare, and when they sign up to receive federal welfare benefits, they enter a tacit contract with these taxing and spending agencies. Regardless of how much the IRS and Social Security Administration may claim that the SSN or EIN is not manifestation of a contract, a donkey by any other name stinks as much. The only way to legally remove oneself from the IRS's jurisdiction is to opt out of Social Security. Anyone in one of the 50 States who doesn't believe that the SSN / EIN is the jurisdictional nexus between the IRS's jurisdiction and a given person or organization should test their disbelief by filing an income tax return without an SSN / EIN. We're not really recommending this, but anyone familiar with tax return forms knows that it's a ridiculous scenario.

Thanks to the 10th Amendment, we have a status that is foreign to the federal secular social compact. Because States are inherently confined to secular police powers, we are foreign to State secular social compacts. We are regulated privately, rather than regulated by their secular statutes. A 501(c)(3) church is a religious organization[note] that is under the jurisdictions of secular governments. Secular governments have no jurisdiction over us unless we surrender our God-given status by contractually consenting to the surrender, or by being guilty of committing a delict, neither of which we ever intend to do. Our primary focus is on doing Kingdom work. Starting from the platform established by the investigation in combination with this inventory, we intend to branch into whatever field the Lord leads us. We will not limit ourselves because of an ill-conceived tax code. As a private organization, we have been created by a private contract, not by a statutory grant of privilege.

The only reason for a church to file the Form 1023 ("Application for Recognition of Exemption Under Section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code") is to help contributors get kickbacks. Even the IRS and the Internal Revenue Code recognize that they cannot legally violate the 1st Amendment by requiring that churches seek to be established through the "federal" or State governments. We fervently refuse to encourage people to seek such kickbacks, such tax-deductions, for reasons made clear below.

The procurement of the 501(c)(3) status (by filing a 1023) is essentially the procurement of a license. Saints like John Bunyan (author of Pilgrim's Progress) chose to go to jail before allowing de facto government to have any control over their ministry. Bunyan is reputed to have been in jail for twelve years, with a license to preach and a pen readily available to him the entire time, his signature being the condition for his release. He never signed. But at the beginning of the 21^st century, "Christian" ministries that refuse to be licensed are pathetically scarce.

The exemption, license, 501(c)(3) privilege, is given by government in exchange for a promise to avoid certain activities that are not only legitimate Christian activities, but even activities mandated by Christian principles (like being involved in the political and legal processes, and even publishing what some might consider "propaganda"). The Church muzzles itself and plays ignorant and dumb in exchange for a "tax-exempt" status. But the status of being exempted from taxes is inherently part of the 1st Amendment. If secular government commits itself to a "separation of church and state", then it commits itself inherently to avoid the taxation of churches, because "[T]he power to tax involves the power to destroy".[note] So the 1st Amendment inherently prevents the creation of statutes (including taxing statutes) that target any particular religion.

Erastian lawyers have connived to ignore these undeniable legal facts. They have led church leaders by their noses to their own self-castration parties. They have led the visible Church of Jesus Christ to be another ignominious, fawning bootlicker for the secular humanist authoritarians. By voluntarily putting themselves under the heavy hand of the IRS, church leaders have set up an idol in their sanctuary, manifested as the ubiquitous golf-fringed flag. Fearing the idol more than God, they're obliged to worry about whether their creeds are recognized by the IRS, and about whether their worship is IRS approved. They bind themselves to a definite, distinct ecclesiastical government that meets IRS guidelines. Rather than getting codes of doctrine and discipline directly from Scripture and related creeds and commentaries, they give the IRS a loud say in what those doctrines and disciplines are. "Churches and religious organizations" have to worry about whether their ministers are properly ordained according to IRS standards, and properly graduated from State-accredited colleges. By signing up for 501(c)(3) status, otherwise Christian churches obligate themselves to be neutral on all political issues. This means that churches cannot engage in political activity opposing pornography. They cannot oppose legislation that says that children belong to the State, rather than to parents. They cannot oppose legislation that sets up State-operated lotteries and gambling operations. They cannot actively participate in opposing the public school system. They cannot openly declare that wherever there's a conflict, the church must obey God rather than government. This political neutrality nonsense is practically boundless. It is an invitation to the worst kinds of spiritual diseases to take over the congregation, the kinds that go undiagnosed until it's too late.

Although the political neutrality issue is one of the worst symptoms of this 501(c)(3) disease, the effect of this pact with the devil on the daily operation of the church is also hideous. The 501(c)(3) status requires that church leadership make the IRS privy to all its financial transactions, including sources, donors, and expenditures. If the church issues cash in any substantial quantity, the leadership will automatically be suspected of money-laundering. All the church's books and records must be available for IRS scrutiny at all times. The church must use only IRS-approved methods of fund-raising. The church must submit the names of all church workers, pastors, teachers, clerks, counsellors, educational directors, office help, worship leaders, associates, and maintenance personnel. The church must encourage its personnel to give unlimited submission to the civil magistrate regarding all federal, State, and local laws, and all public policy. Church leadership cannot publicly oppose licensing of church ministers. The IRS will hold church leadership accountable for any stand the leadership takes against the existing tax system. The church must encourage congregants to pay taxes, even taxes that they do not lawfully owe.

This is far from an exhaustive list of the 501(c)(3)'s malefactions. We give it here as an open declaration of what we are NOT. We give it here also to dissuade other people from falling into this trap. Anyone who has doubts about the veracity of the above claims should spend some time reading the IRS publications on tax exemption requirements for "churches and religious organizations" at irs.gov. Read them with an eye to honoring God instead of man.

The church –– meaning the Church of Jesus Christ (generally), any church of any religion (more generally), and any local church of any variety (specifically) –– is immune from taxation by its very nature.[note] Our organization is inherently non-taxable. Whereas the burden of proof is on the 501(c)(3) organization to establish and maintain its status, the burden of proof is on the IRS and other secular agencies to prove that we have some status other than the one we claim. If any secular government were to insist on taking anything of value from us, we would demand to be justly compensated in advance for the taking. Officers and agents of such governments need to ask for our consent to the taking, even if they intend to take regardless of our consent. In the case of taxation, they need to supply an itemized bill that categorizes benefits into lawful jural and ecclesiastical functions of government. If they were to refuse to thereby supply proof that we were being justly compensated, then they should expect to receive no revenues from us. They would need to make an itemized list of their expenditures so that we are certain that we are paying only what is lawful under our religion. Our religion comes first, before their demands. This is true both by way of our religious claims, and by way of historical American jurisprudence. But under the present tax structure, we believe we are secure and legal in our claim to be outside their jurisdictional boundaries.

Contact Us:

Regarding Gifts: Even though we might issue receipts for donations, we intend to perpetually avoid issuing them for the sake of tax-deduction. We believe that taking such tax deductions violates an important principle of alms-giving. It may be legal for you to take a tax deduction on gifts you give to us, and it may be legal for us to give you a receipt, but we strongly recommend against you seeking such tax deductions. One of our reasons for taking this posture can be found, among other places, in Matthew 6:3-4: "But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing that your alms may be in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will repay you." (NASB). To do otherwise is to pollute the offering. You may have no qualms about doing this, but we have serious misgivings about encouraging you or anyone else to violate this clear standard. Giving with the intent of getting kickbacks is pollution of the offering. An acceptable offering is given to glorify God, and only to glorify God. We're convinced that the IRS does not have lawful jurisdiction over us. We therefore do not recognize any obligation to comply with IRS demands. Anyone who makes a donation to this ministry, then attempts to get an "income tax deduction" based on such donation, should not expect any assistance from us in tax court. If you're such a duplicitous person, or someone who likes to play both sides against the middle, then keep your donation, because we don't want it. But if you understand what we're about, and want to help, we treat your gift as worthy of our Father's full repayment.

Regarding Currency: As one sage law professor puts it: "Our money is our law.".[note] If we choose to use frns as our preferred currency, then we choose to live under the laws associated with that currency. That means that we choose to live under the warped laws of these secular governments, rather than under the laws that are lawful under a secular government, or under laws that are lawful under a religious social compact. So preferring a secular currency is in essence a form of idolatry. That's not to say that we should never use secular currency. It merely means that currency of a lawful government, whether it's of a secular or religious nature, is always preferable to currency of an unlawful government. By allowing such unlawful government to control not only the status of the Church, but also the currency used daily by Christians, we have rendered unto Caesar that which is Christ's alone. —— Because we are committed to honoring Jesus Christ as King of kings in all areas of life, we prefer to trade using Kingdom currency, rather than to trade using secular currency (meaning, in the united States, frns). But given that we know of no currency circulated by a Christian religious social compact, we take frns out of necessity, but only in certain forms.

Regarding Contact: As mentioned above, hardcopy of this Theological Inventory of American Jurisprudence is available on a pay-as-you're-able basis. If you want the hardcopy, or to contact us for any other reason, please do so at this electronic post location:

Hey@BJP-TIAJ.net

We welcome your comments, criticism, insights, suggestions, encouragement … .

Please Link to this Website: Please copy and paste these hyperlinks into web pages as you're inclined:

Basic Jurisdictional Principles: An Investigation into the Biblical Undergirdings of Human Law

Basic Jurisdictional Principles: A Theological Inventory of American Jurisprudence