John, The issue you wish to focus upon is “ownership”.  You have chosen to look at the issue of money printed by the Fed as the eternal property of the Fed, regardless of who is in possession of the dollars, how it was subsequently acquired, or how it was retired.  You then use this purported ownership of all money as the basis for condemning fiat money.  You attribute to the Fed all the rights and responsibilities of ownership of all money to the Fed.  You ignore the concept of transference of rights of ownership to those who possesses the symbols of value by work and trade.

 

 

You assume that “the creator is the owner” is the eternal state – once a creator, always an owner. 

This is obviously not true in all contexts.  You disregard the spectrum of ownership types.  There are many de facto ownership types.  All owners are temporary/intermediary owners, except God.  God alone owns all things, but we still own His property in various ways. 

We can acquire ownership by gift, inheritance, or payment of equivalent value (work, traded goods/services of equivalent, negotiated/agreed upon value).  We can acquire effective ownership by residence (homesteading), or Be given effective ownership by being given/trusted with the authority to use property based upon a power of attorney.  There are quasi ownership states such as the manager and executive (although these truly are not ownership because such positions are merely hirelings, compensated for doing a particular job.  Still to the extent the manager takes ownership of his responsibility, it is in fact his, and he owns it.).  The builder of the house is not the owner forever, but he is the owner while the house is under construction and before sale and transfer of deed. 

 

 

Again, the primal concept of ownership originates with God.  His act of creation gives him the right to anything He desires in the universe, which is the most functional definition of ownership.  Given that he is the owner of all, he can transfer the right to do anything to a person.  He has transferred ownership rights and responsibilities to men, their bodies, and their possessions.  He has retained ultimate right to intervene with sovereign force and will in certain conditions.  Still, men have effective ownership  rights to their body and property, even though God has created all, and has ultimate right to exercise authority and action under rare circumstances.

 

 

God is of course the owner of all things and people and all actions, always was, and always will be.  It is He that has made us, and not we ourselves.  In Him we live and move and have our being. 

As people living on this earth, all ownership of all property, goods, or services is temporary.  All ownership eventually reverts back to Him.  But, by His will, by the authority vested in Him, he has the right to relinquish authority and responsibility to each individual.  Albeit temporary and conditional, he has transferred the right and responsibility of ownership of our bodies and properties to each of us individually.  The fact of God’s ultimate ownership does not diminish the fact of our ownership of our bodies (a gift) and that which we create (our work).  In general, we own stuff on this earth by creating stuff, gift, or theft.  We add energy, intention, and the matter together, and by so doing, we create the stuff that we own.  Theft is ownership deed obtained without willful transfer by the previous owner.

 

I am reinterpreting what you are saying about "relinquishing" to us by God. I don't think you mean that God abandons the right to judge us for whatever we do with the stuff He has entrusted to us. We both do mean that between humans, we are responsible for what is done with the property, and other humans should suffer consequences if they attempt to control said property against our will.

 

Also, I would modify your 'creating, gift, theft' to add 'trade' as a separate category, although you could argue that trade comes under the 'gift' umbrella. "Gift" being thought of as unconditional, because, in a trade, there are really two sides giving equally, or at least to each others satisfaction. Your "theft" I would modify as "winning in a fair fight" like David obtaining real title to Goliath's sword and armor. Among men, no one would dispute David's title to it. And in the same way, Jesus overcame Satan, the 'strong man', and plundered his 'house'.

 

 

You have attributed theft and fraud to fiat money, because the fed has created it, and still owns it, and they will call it back eventually.  But the relationship of the Fed to money is roughly equivalent to God and His creation of the universe.  By analogy, the  Fed has created money symbols (which in fact have quantity, measure, and substance, units, dollars, and paper/electrons).  Their ownership is transferred by conscious assent of the original owner/creator to the new owner upon meeting the conditions of a contract.  The transfer was made with the provision that the money be eventually returned. [Not sure this is true. The Fed knows full well, as does every thinking adult, that the Treasury borrowing that is occuring now will never be paid back in the normal sense of the word. Borrowing new money to pay those debts back, is not paying debt.]

 

Again, I have to object to your 'symbol', 'substance' terminology here. It is true, the Federal Reserve "note" bill is manufactured out of materials that God created, but we are talking 'ex nihilo' creation, not manufacture. That bill would be a symbol of the dollar, in that (supposedly) it could be redeemed for the dollar. So our topic is not any creation of symbols. It is not even about the electronic-signature equivalent that is representative of the dollar. We could have had those, if the silver-dollar coins would have remained until the internet. In that case, we would have had real, manufactured electronic bits switched that would represent title to silver coins, and those electronic or paper-written indicators of title would indeed by symbols of the dollars owned. But they would be manufactured and not created ex nihilo by men. But we are not talking about paper-bill or electronic representation. And by definition the Fed cannot create 16 trillion anything, ex nihilo, that has substance unless they are displacing the Logos, Who, by His word, created all that is, and upholds it by the word of His power. And, a moot point anyway, because even if they did create, out of nothing, electrons, or cellulose atoms and molecules, that matter would not be the dollar as the Federal Reserve Act and operations define and demonstrate. May the Holy Spirit grant us enlightenment on these difficult points.

 

 

The new holder/contractee/possessor of the money is now the new owner, and as such has the right to do with it as he pleases [but only within limits that the banking system defines. The new "owner" cannot take possession of the wealth independent of the banking system. He cannot take it "out of the bank" without just leveraging the fiction of debt transfer.].  This ownership may be conditional, but then, all ownership is conditional (we can make a log house, but do not have the right to demolish it with a nuclear weapon – the limits of our ownership end where the space of others begins).  This is somewhat similar to our relationship to God – we have ownership of our bodies, but do not have the absolute right to do anything with our bodies.  All ownership begins as a superior/originator to inferior/subsequent-owner relationship.  But, this does not diminish the fact that the subsequent owners have the right to use the money as a symbol of value and exchange, and have all the rights associated with possessing it.

 

You correctly note that fiat money starts its life being fabricated by the central banks.  They made it by applying energy, will, and matter together to create symbols that are subsequently recognized as money.  The originators/printers/manufacturers own it initially.  

Of course you are right in the basics of who owns the dollar bills.  The owner of all money is the person/entity who the created the dollars, loans them, under terms of a contract, to be repaid with interest, insures that they will all come back to him.  But, as true as that statement is about the owner of the money, that owner does not have a claim to the goods and services that people exchange.  The fact that contracts were written on paper made by someone else who still owned that paper does not make the owner of the paper the owner of the property conveyed by the contract written on that paper.  There is a break/distinction/disconnect/ dissociation between the dollar bills, which will ultimately revert in possession back to Fed NY, and the goods and services produced by the average citizen and exchanged for the goods and services owned and traded by other citizens.  All of these goods and services have QMS, and there is not theft or deception involved in any transaction (If the Fed NY, Primary lenders, and/or Government tries to use some of these symbols to appropriate real goods and services, without having provided a commensurate service, this is theft.  But in fact, the Fed does provide a service, they generate symbols, dole them out judiciously, receive interest in return.  Fed NY has as much right to spend that interest as any other service organization who is compensated by a fraction of the cash flow that they handle.  )

The Fed is not the owner of, nor associated with, the exchange of goods and services mediated by fiat money.  These transactions were all honest, to the extent that the society authorized this group (Fed NY) to be compensated in the amount of the interest received. 

The fact that Fed NY prints $, and gets interest for doing so, is Not the source of the problem with fiat money.  Rather, the problem is due to the fact that government has used a borrowing procedure ruse to obtain money to give to people on welfare of various sorts, which in turn buys votes, puts more demand on the store of societal value, and changes the relationship between it and the quantity of money chasing goods and services.  

 

Not if the Fed didn't loan money for govt debt. The govt could perform the evil by borrowing from individuals and countries and banks, instead of the Fed directly or indirectly. It would be wrong for the govt to do these things, whether they tax or borrow, because God defines it as sin and crime. It doesn't make it any better because they borrow it from non-FED sources. And the Fed could loan money to Govt that it got from other sources. Money creation is a separate thing from the government. But, as you know, the way the two partners collaborate does fool and confuse a lot of people so that they do not see their responsibility under God, that if they do not punish perjury and theft the way God defines, God will punish them all, and probably with the very criminals they refuse to punish.

 

Inflation results.  Thus, the problem is not one of ownership, but of abuse of the position of ownership and rights given to it by society.  Thus, the need to audit the Fed, to find out what are the transactions it has executed, to see whether they have stayed within their charter as authorized by the people in their role as creators of money symbols.

 

Before God, people cannot truly transfer (alienate) their property rights over to the banks. Those rights are non-transferabel (inalienable). But, in practice, we acknowledge that is what they are doing in their delusion and self-destruction.

 

You have taken that fact that NY Fed has created money symbols, in a way that is akin to how God creates, when in fact He is the only creator.  You claim that there cannot be actual ownership of dollars because they do not have quantity measure and substance (an assertion which is untrue).  

 

Please define for me the substance, and the measure you are using to measure it?

 

You declare that the bills/money/dollars/scrip that they loaned out are fraudulent, a lie. [see above where I try to show that nothing goes "out"] And from these assemblage of disparate, incongruous, non-sequiturs that then system of fiat money creation is inherently evil, and that God will curse the nation who uses this system.  You use the assertion that fiat money has no quantity measure and substance (which was the pattern of exchange described in the Bible). [Right. Even though I use the word "quantity" a lot, because there is math and numbers, if there is no measure whereby you are quantifying the substance -- there is nothing to count. I can't see it any other way but that substance is non-existant and undefinable, the measures are non-existant and undefinable, and quantities are non-existant because there is nothing to count.] In all this, I believe you are in error.  You claim that money was condemned inherently because the underlying source of the pieces of paper were issued out of nothing, loaned at interest, and ultimately always owned by the originating entity.

 

The fact or the origination of money has been created by the Fed is not the cause of the problem and curse.  It is rather, the misuse of the authority to print money, and by that authority to steal. [They are not mis-using the faux authority the people idolatrously attribute to them. The public (and bankers behind them propagandizing them) wanted this, and the false advantage they thought it would give them over their neighbor. It enables the people to steal from their neighbor in partner with the bank. This is why they want to do it. It is is not misuse, it is the intended use.]  There is nothing inherently evil with printing scrip and using it for symbols of value.  [Provided the definition of value is an honest definition, understood the same by both trading partners. What does the value consist of, and how is that value measured? What unit of measure are you using, so that when you count out some "value" you come up with a definite number?] The evil comes in the counterfeiting of it without introducing it into the economy without proper initiation by contract to produce value. 

 

This is your key idea you are so proud of, and I have no idea what it means. I don't know how or why there is any thing meritorious about what is done with the loaned money that makes any difference other than the fact that the money borrowed gets paid back. I have never heard you explain (though I have asked you many questions) where the theft, kidnapping, or murder is - in this evil function of creating money from nothing by the loaning to someone who pays it all back, but doesn't accomplish the "producing value". If there is evil in it, then what does the Bible say the punishment should be for this crime?

 

How are you going to measure, detect, convict, apprehend, sentence, and punish the evil doer in this aspect? Remember our discussions where I tried to point out, that the only way to do this was an international unified banking system, a unified currency, and a sovereign world authority to hire an information-gathering and enforcement team that would have to commit horrible invasions of privacy, as well as having a global electronic network that would require every trader to exchange through it, if they wanted to buy and sell. Why doesn't this sound Satanic to you?

 

The average person uses these pieces of scrip/electron symbols to represent the hard earned credit they now own for producing goods and services. [Can you define "credit"? Can you define "credit" as a quantity of measurable substance? Can you define "credit" without using the "things" you are trying to define as the very terms inherent in your definition? ((you will need to read that sentence about 5 times)).] They engage in honest exchange as they trade scrip/money for other goods and services of value.  

 

Are they being honest about the substance that is being traded? Is it possible to be either honest or fraudulent in describing the substance? Is it falsifyable? Is it verifiable?

 

Are they being honest about the Measures that are measuring aforesaid Substance? Is it possible to be either honest or fraudulent in describing the substance? Is it falsifyable? Is it verifiable?

 

You can't be honest about the counting or any "symbols" until you have hard definitions of the above, or else the quantities are dishonest as well.

 

There is no sin/theft/fraud associated with the exchange of goods and services using a piece of paper as the medium. 

 

All which I readily admit and advocate, provided the symbols symbolize some thing, and that we are honest about that thing.

 

 The fact is that every link (including Fed NY) in the money-exchange process is based upon a contract to freely exchange these symbols of credit/service/value with every other entity in the exchange process.  

 

and I am trying to show you that honest is impossible, even if it was desired, which it is generally not.

 

Fed NY has a unique authority, [I am always wondering why they should have this unique authority] even their authority is limited by the approval of the people, government. 

 

This is what I am begging for you and all to see, and then to turn, change our minds, and begin to practice  limiting down the authority and trust we have given them -- and to bring all under the captivity to the rightful owner and rightful lawgiver, the Lord Jesus Christ. Our trust and obedience is their only power. They have no rightful, righteous authority from God.

 

If their authority to print money is abused, the people can as a final retaliation against the abuse resort to force.  The Fed is not immune to all force applied against it. [At least, up until Andrew Jackson 1836. Fiat, counterfeit, paper money: has been a continual problem since before 1646. Absolutely every time, the results have included some mix of theft, slavery, poverty, war, and murder.]

 

The problems that arise, and cursing of the nation, comes because of the ease of theft associated with fiat money.  Men willfully commit sinful acts.  Men who are in places of power, trust, and authority, divert money from its intended use as a medium of exchange, and instead transfer its ownership and use to others for their personal advantage. [To their own personal advantage is what the Fed system is doing when they can collect rent on money that costs them nothing, that they do not have to give up the use of. Quite rightly they never do have the use of any money except in the saying that others owe them quantities, for which they get to recieve the profit of usury from.] The key here is that this is not a free market transaction, this is an act of fiat, a command, a declaration, a tyranny/slavery of sorts.  It is a betrayal of trust, it is a theft, an unauthorized transfer of wealth.  People are moved to give their goods and services to the owner of money, and Fed NY (or any agency/entity they transfer money to) can by their authority to print money, give that money to anyone for use as its owner.  If this gift/transfer is outside of their charter, it is theft.  This is where the curse is. 

 

Gold prevents such unauthorized wholesale theft.  [Actually, most quantities of measurable substance created in 6 days by the Lord Jesus Christ prevent such unauthorized wholesale theft, although silver and gold, and heavy on silver, has been man's money since the beginning. Banks, even Bernanke, betray the fact that it is still money to them as well. Why do they want to control it so desperately?]

 

Gold fraud still occurs, but the scale of theft is by the nature of gold’s limited supply, and the impossibility of generation by fiat, insures against the possibility of wholesale fraud.  Fiat money allows for fraud.  Fiat money is Not fraud inherently. Disagree. It is always idolatrous, in that it claims to be a human action that is only possible as a divine action. Disagree, in that it always steals the value you away, by marketplace action and voluntary price-setting -- from prior owners of the fiat-ed fictions. Now if everybody agrees to the fraud, the theft, the slavery, the poverty, starvation, and death -- then you might say it is less unjust to the willing fools that submit, and more their own fault. They think it is far better than submitting to Jesus. We are the Lord's freemen, we are not free or authorized to enslave ourselves to men, especially evil warmonging men.

 

You appear to believe that because there is a falsehood, an illegitimate representation of exchanging value for value, that the system that the entire system is a lie, corrupt, evil, and cursed. [I can't understand what these phrases mean "representation of exchanging value for value" without better definition.]

 

You extrapolate and focus on the fact that that Fed NY generated these symbols, which would not have had market value commensurate with their face value, as proof that the entire chain of money is illegitimate, a fraud. 

 

If these "symbols" have value, they only have value because they draw away the value of all the other symbols in the world. When men treat them as having value, it is impossible to not detract from the value of all the other symbols, over time. You talk like you have never played a round of monopoly by combining two games worth of the money, and passing out twice as much to each player, and allowing universal bidding on each property that any player lands on.

 

You have in essence delegitimized all the exchanges made in the entire system.  In fact, men were willing to serve in exchange for these symbols of value.  These symbols have been sanctified by their sacrifice.  [or their slavish service has been cheapened by their foolish delusion] The only illegitimacy is obtaining and using these symbols without authority by their owner (i.e. the charter that governs their creation and exchange.) [I maintain that the original charter of the 1694 founding of the Bank of England, the 1913 Federal Reserve Act by the US Congress and all their cousins defy the Lord (owner), King (law-giver, law-evaluator, and law-enforcer), and Creator of All.]

 

There are no doubt consequences to basing the money on symbols that are controlled by a central source, which are then used by all men, for the exchange of all value. 

 

As in, no man could buy or sell unless he had the mark or the name?

 

But, those consequences are not the ones that you dwell upon in your criticism of money.  The consequences are simply that the government and possibly other agencies close to Fed NY may be able to manipulate the system so that they get more of these symbols of value than would be normally credited to their accounts based on the service rendered.  In other words, Fed NY can appropriate the possession of more money symbols than is authorized under their charter.  Thus, they can exchange these symbols for actual value, under the pretense of being symbols of value they obtained by work and sacrifice.  That is the contract of exchange in the market.  Money is only valid if it was obtained through a legitimate contract to produce value (at some point in the chain of possession).  Money represents contracts freely entered into by men to produce value, and are in turn willing to exchange that produced value for the symbols of credit/value, which are put into circulation through a contract with Fed NY. 

 

You need to think these things through better and use other words besides "value", "symbol". If you are going to have a contract, you need to specify clearly the quantity, measure, and substance that you are trading -- including the money-side. If there is going to be value, there has to be some thing that men value. I don't know what thing you are refering to, that is there that exists, that any man can value.

 

And your symbols have to be symbols of some thing, they can't be just symbols hanging in the air, there can't be "value" hanging in the air. Value is an attribute of some thing.

 

The source of evil is the appropriation of symbols of value without providing commensurate value.  [It is a lot harder to appropriate symbols of value WITH providing commensurate value when you have no way to define or cummunicate what object your symbols symbolize, and what thing folks are supposed to value.]

 

This is a type of theft.  The advantage of gold, is that it is not possible for anyone in the system to fabricate its existence and ownership. [This is not an advantage, if the whole point is that you are not going to have good economic growth and prosperity unless unless one world bank has the ability to fabricate costless symbols of value to incite people to produce value to fulfill their contracts to provide value in exchange for paying more symbols for the privilege of renting symbols of value.] With fiat money it is easier to fake owning credit symbols representing value, and that ability goes away when the symbols cannot be manufactures, but instead can only be obtained by doing service.

 

The digging of metal from the ground is a type of service.  It makes all money honest, in the sense that there is no one that can fabricate money by saying it is money.  There are no cheats in such a system.  There are still suckers, thieves, carneys and marks in a gold/commodity-based money system, but there is no one who can generate money out of nothing 

 

Having said that, it is not the source of the money that corrupts the system, it is what people do because they can create money out of nothing. [It could be as simple as men claiming to be like god, lying, and stealing.] They have difficulty resisting the temptation to use that power, and that money, for appropriating goods and services which they did not deserve[stealing?].  In other words, people have difficulties not being cheats and thieves.  In a world where the source of the money is transparent, and all could see where the trail of money flowed if desired, then the cheats would be  caught/apprehended/stopped/exposed/shamed and the problem of unjust appropriation of fiat money would be stemmed.  The problem is not the source or method by which money is generated/created/put into circulation.  Rather, the problem is that fiat money makes it possible for men to steal vast quantities of money.  A theft of this magnitude would not be possible in a gold-based money system.  Sin, covetousness, lust of power, theft, easy gain, sloth and desire for reward without being deserving – that is the problem. [because it is the problem, we don't put a billion megaton atomic bomb in a suitcase]

 

When you start advocating against the theft that fiat money allows, rather than impugning the simple fact that the originator of money made interest on money that he printed, you will gain more traction in your arguments for gold.  [Let's just have laws, then, which prohibit people from using their ability to print up all the money they want (but only to loan out at interest to others) in a manner that steals from others.]

 

You are losing people with your condemnation of paper. [I am not condemning paper or printing. I am condemning lying and stealing, in faithful representation of the Bible and the law of the Lord Jesus Christ.] The problem is not the paper/electron symbols of value.  Fiat money does have quantity [what are you counting], measure [what is your unit of measure, what is it equivalent to? how do you count it?], and substance [what is that substance? how do you measure it?] in its own symbolic way [what does the symbol symbolize].  The problem is that the QMS of paper money is too easily manufactured, [the non-paper, non-printed money which you refer to as being paper and printed, is not easily manufactured. The point is that it is not possible to manufacture this kind of money from anything at all or create from nothing, which is what fiat means]  which makes it easy to pretend right to have the free-market authorization to exchange it for hard goods and services.  The fact is, that fiat money serves as well as gold in its function as symbols of value for the average guy as he conducts transactions of exchange.  Your argument against money does not hit the ground where the problem lies.  Please consider adopting these ideas in replacement for the ones you have been using.  If you do, you might actually make a difference in making the world a better place.  Your current line of argumentation will not produce fruit.

 

T.