Category: Uncategorized

First Council of Nicaea

https://youtu.be/ZyYvQDlKktw

First Council of Nicaea

Nicea.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea

The First Council of Nicaea (/naɪˈsiːə/; Greek: Νίκαια [ˈnikεa]) was a council of Christian bishops convened in the Bithynian city of Nicaea (now İznik, Turkey) by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in AD 325.

This ecumenical council was the first effort to attain consensus in the church through an assembly representing all Christendom. Hosius of Corduba may have presided over its deliberations.[4][5]

Its main accomplishments were settlement of the Christological issue of the divine nature of God the Son and his relationship to God the Father,[2] the construction of the first part of the Nicene Creed, establishing uniform observance of the date of Easter,[6] and promulgation of early canon law.[3][7]

escheat (n.)

the reverting of land to a king or lord in certain cases, early 14c., from Anglo-French eschete (late 13c.), Old French eschete “succession, inheritance,” literally “that which falls to one,” noun use of fem. past participle of escheoir “happen, befall, occur, take place; fall due; lapse (legally),” from Late Latin *excadere “to fall out,” from Latin ex “out, away” (see ex-) + cadere “to fall” (from PIE root *kad- “to fall”). As a verb, from late 14c. Related: Escheated; escheating. Late Latin *excadere represents a restored form of excidere, which yielded

Only Belligerents Have Rights

The individual Rights guaranteed by our Constitution can be compromised or ignored by our government. For example, in United States v. Johnson, 76 F. Supp. 538, 539 (D. Pa. 1947), Federal District Court Judge James Alger Fee ruled that, “The privilege against self-incrimination is neither accorded to the passive resistant, nor to the person who is ignorant of his rights, nor to one indifferent thereto. It is a FIGHTING clause. It’s benefits can be retained only by sustained COMBAT. It cannot be claimed by attorney or solicitor. It is valid only when insisted upon by a BELLIGERENT claimant in person.” McAlister vs. Henkel, 201 U.S. 90, 26 S.Ct. 385, 50 L.Ed. 671; Commonwealth vs. Shaw, 4 Cush. 594, 50 Am.Dec. 813; Orum vs. State, 38 Ohio App. 171, 175 N.E. 876. The one who is persuaded by honeyed words or moral suasion to testify or produce documents rather than make a last ditch stand, simply loses the protection. . . . He must refuse to answer or produce, and test the matter in contempt proceedings, or by habeas corpus.” [Emphasis added.]

http://www.freedom-school.com/belligerent-claimant/index.htm