License

Comprehending laws and contracts is impossible, unless we first learn the meaning of the words and phrases they contain.

Moderator: notmartha

Post Reply
User avatar
editor
Site Admin
Posts: 687
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:24 am
Contact:

License

Post by editor » Sat May 07, 2016 7:33 am

Black's Law Dictionary, 2nd Edition
License.
  • In the law of contracts. A permission, accorded by a competent authority, conferring the right to do some act which without such authorization would be illegal, or would be a trespass or a tort. State v. Hipp, 38 Ohio St 226; Youngblood v. Sexton, 32 Mich. 406, 20 Am. Rep. 654; Hubman v. State, 61 Ark. 482, 33 S. Wl 843; Chicago v. Collins, 175 III. 445, 51 N. E. 907, 49 L. R. A. 408, 67 L. R. A. 224. Also the written evidence of such permission.
  • In real property law. An authority to do a particular act or series of acts upon an other's land without possessing any estate therein. Clifford v. O'Neill, 12 App. Dlv. 17, 42 N. Y. Snpp. 607; Davis v. Townsend, 10 Barb. (N. Y.) 343; Morrill v. Mackman, 24 Mich. 282, 9 Am. Rep. 124; Wynn v. Garland, 19 Ark. 23, 68 Am. Dec. 190 ; Cheever v. Pearson, 16 Pick. (Mass.) 266. Also the written evidence of authority so accorded.
    It is distinguished from an "easement," which implies an interest in the land to be affected, and a "lease," or right to take the profits of land. It may be, however, and often, is, coupled with a grant of some interest in the land itself, or right to take the profits. 1 Washb. Real Prop. *398.
  • In pleading. A plea of justification to an action of trespass that the defendant was authorized by the owner of the freehold to commit the trespass complained of.
  • In the law of patents. A written authority granted by the owner of a patent to another person empowering the latter to make or use the patented article for a limited period or in a limited territory.
  • In International law. Permission granted by a belligerent state to its own subjects, or to the subjects of the enemy, to carry on a trade interdicted by war. Wheat. Int. Law, 447.
(various specific licenses are listed and defined)
--
Editor
Lawfulpath.com
User avatar
notmartha
Posts: 735
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:16 pm

Re: License

Post by notmartha » Sun May 08, 2016 7:48 am

KJV References

Epitrepō, Greek Strong's #2010, is used 19 times in the New Testament. It is translated as suffer (10), permit (4), give leave (2), give liberty (1), give license (1), let (1). It is translate as “give license” in the following verse:
Acts 21:39-40 (KJV)
But Paul said, I am a man which am a Jew of Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city: and, I beseech thee, suffer me to speak unto the people. And when he had given him licence, Paul stood on the stairs, and beckoned with the hand unto the people. And when there was made a great silence, he spake unto them in the Hebrew tongue, saying,
Topos, Greek Strong's Number 5117, is found 92 times in the New Testament. It is translated as place (80), room (5), quarter (2), licence (1), coast (1), where (1), plain + <G3977> (1), rock + <G5138> (1). It is translated as “license” in the following verse:
Acts 25:16 (KJV)
To whom I answered, It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man to die, before that he which is accused have the accusers face to face, and have licence to answer for himself concerning the crime laid against him.
Webster’s Dictionary, 1828
LI'CENSE, noun [Latin licentia, from liceo, to be permitted.]

1. Leave; permission; authority or liberty given to do or forbear any act. A license may be verbal or written; when written, the paper containing the authority is called a license A man is not permitted to retail spirituous liquors till he has obtained a license

2. Excess of liberty; exorbitant freedom; freedom abused, or used in contempt of law or decorum.
License they mean, when they cry liberty.

LI'CENSE, verb transitive

1. To permit by grant of authority; to remove legal restraint by a grant of permission; as, to license a man to keep an inn.

2. To authorize to act in a particular character; as, to license a physician or a lawyer.

3. To dismiss. [Not in use.]
Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856
LICENSE, contracts.

1. A right given by some competent authority to do an act, which without such authority would be illegal. The instrument or writing which secures this right, is also called a license. Vide Ayl. Parerg, 353; 15 Vin. Ab. 92; Ang. Wat. Co. 61, 85.

2. A license is express or implied. An express license is one which in direct terms authorizes the performance of a certain act; as a license to keep a tavern given by public authority.

3. An implied license is one which though not expressly given, may be presumed from the acts of the party having a right to give it. The following are examples of such licenses: 1. When a man knocks at another's door, and it is opened, the act of opening the door licenses the former to enter the house for any lawful purpose. See Hob. 62. A servant is, in consequence of his employment, licensed to admit to the house, those who come on his master's business, but only such persons. Selw. N. P. 999; Cro. Eliz. 246. It may, however, be inferred from circumstances that the servant has authority to invite whom he pleases to the house, for lawful purposes. See 2 Greenl. Ev. §427; Entry.

4. A Iicense is either a bare authority, without interest, or it is coupled with an interest. 1. A bare license must be executed by the party to whom it is given in person, and cannot be made over or assigned by him to another; and, being without consideration, may be revoked at pleasure, as long as it remains executory; 39 Hen. VI. M. 12, page 7; but when carried into effect, either partially or altogether, it can only be rescinded, if in its nature it will admit of revocation, by placing the other side in the same situation in which he stood before he entered on its execution. 8 East, R. 308; Palm. 71; S. C. Poph. 151; S. C. 2 Roll. Rep. 143, 152.

5. 2. When the license is coupled with an interest the authority conferred is not properly a mere permission, but amounts to a grant, which cannot be revoked, and it may then be assigned to a third person. 5 Hen. V., M. 1, page 1; 2 Mod. 317; 7 Bing. 693; 8 East, 309; 5 B. & C. 221; 7 D. & R. 783; Crabb on R. P. §521 to 525; 14 S. & R 267; 4 S. & R. 241; 2 Eq. Cas. Ab. 522. When the license is coupled with an interest, the formalities essential to confer such interest should be observed. Say. R. 3; 6 East, R. 602; 8 East, R. 310, note. See 14 S. & R. 267; 4 S. & R. 241; 2 Eq. Cas. Ab. 522; 11 Ad. & El. 34, 39; S. C. 39 Eng, C. L. R. 19.

LICENSE, International law.

1. An authority given by one of two belligerent parties, to the citizens or subjects of the other, to carry on a specified trade.

2. The effects of the license are to suspend or relax the rules of war to the extent of the authority given. It is the assumption of a state of peace to the extent of the license. In the country which grants them, licenses to carry on a pacific commerce are stricti juris, as being exceptions to the general rule; though they are not to be construed with pedantic accuracy, nor will every small deviation be held to vitiate the fair effect of them. 4 Rob. Rep. 8; Chitty, Law of Nat. 1 to 5, and 260; 1 Kent, Com. 164, 85.

LlCENSE, pleading. The name of a plea of justification to an action of trespass. A license must be specially pleaded, and cannot, like liberum tenementum, be given in evidence under the general issue. 2. T. R. 166, 108

LICENSEE. One to whom a license has been given. 1 M. Q. & S. 699 n.
Black's Law Dictionary, 1st edition, 1891
license blacks 1.JPG
license blacks 1.JPG (82.87 KiB) Viewed 4223 times
The Century Dictionary, an Encyclopedic Lexicon of the English Language, 1895
license cent.JPG
license cent.JPG (177.31 KiB) Viewed 4223 times

Anti-Thought Control Dictionary, Ben Williams
LICENSE

CONTROLLED MEANING: Lawful authorization to do something. Licenses are necessary for the protection of the public and to maintain orderly society. Licenses prevent us from hurting ourselves and other people.

CORRECT DEFINITION: A license is an indulgence issued by government to allow a citizen to do something which would otherwise be considered illegal. Licensing is a practice created by government to control the activities of citizens and raise revenues. A licensed man is a controlled man, either voluntarily or involuntarily.
State of the Union Address, Franklin D. Roosevelt, January 3, 1934
In the past few months, as a result of our action, we have demanded of many citizens that they surrender certain licenses to do as they please in their business relationships; but we have asked this in exchange for the protection which the State can give against exploitation by their fellow men or by combinations of their fellow men.
Michael Badnarik said:
"How bad do things have to get before you do something? Do they have to take away all your property? Do they have to license every activity that you want to engage in? Do they have to start throwing you on cattle cars before you say “now wait a minute, I don’t think this is a good idea.” How long is it going to be before you finally resist and say “No, I will not comply. Period!” Ask yourself now because sooner or later you are going to come to that line, and when they cross it, you’re going to say well now cross this line; ok now cross that line; ok now cross this line. Pretty soon you’re in a corner. Sooner or later you’ve got to stand your ground whether anybody else does or not. That is what liberty is all about."

Harry A. Blackmun said:
By placing discretion in the hands of an official to grant or deny a license, such a statute creates a threat of censorship that by its very existence chills free speech.
Hartley Coleridge:
But what is Freedom? Rightly understood, A universal licence to be good.
Voltarine de Cleyre:
Make no laws whatever concerning speech, and speech will be free; so soon as you make a declaration on paper that speech shall be free, you will have a hundred lawyers proving that “freedom does not mean abuse, nor liberty license,” and they will define freedom out of existence.
Felix Frankfurter:
A court which yields to the popular will thereby licenses itself to practice despotism, for there can be no assurance that it will not on another occasion indulge its own will.
Milton Friedman:
[Trade licensing] almost inevitably becomes a tool in the hands of a special producer group to maintain a monopoly position at the expense of the rest of the public. There is no way to avoid this result.
Jacob G. Hornberger:
Another major reason why crime is increasing is that crime pays, and in our tax-ridden, regulation crushed economy, many people cannot economically survive through low-end jobs. ... 'The income that offenders can earn in the world of crime, as compared with the world of work, all too often makes crime appear to be the better choice.' In Washington, D.C., it costs $7,000 in city fees to open a pushcart. In California, up to eighty federal and state licenses are required to open a small business. In New York, a medallion to operate a taxicab costs $150,000. More than 700 occupations in the United States require a government license. Throughout the country, church soup kitchens are being closed by departments of health. No wonder so many people turn to crime and violence to survive.
The cult of the omnipotent state has millions of followers in the united States. Americans of today view their government in the same way as Christians view their God; they worship and adore the state and they render their lives and fortunes to it. Statists believe that their lives -- their very being -- are a privilege that the state has given to them. They believe that everything they do is -- and should be -- dependent on the consent of the government. Thus, statists support such devices as income taxation, licensing laws, regulations, passports, trade restrictions, and the like.
Eric Idle:
At least one way of measuring the freedom of any society is the amount of comedy that is permitted, and clearly a healthy society permits more satirical comment than a repressive, so that if comedy is to function in some way as a safety release then it must obviously deal with these taboo areas. This is part of the responsibility we accord our licensed jesters, that nothing be excused the searching light of comedy. If anything can survive the probe of humour it is clearly of value, and conversely all groups who claim immunity from laughter are claiming special privileges which should not be granted.
Hugh LaFollette:
Consequently, any activity that is potentially harmful to others and requires certain demonstrated competence for its safe performance, is subject to regulation that is, it is theoretically desirable that we regulate it. ... In fact, I dare say that parenting is a paradigm of such activities since the potential for harm is great (both in the extent of harm any one person can suffer and in the number of people potentially harmed) and the need for competence is so evident. Consequently, there is good reason to believe that parents should be licensed.
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin:
A system of licensing and registration is the perfect device to deny gun ownership to the bourgeoisie.
John Milton:
None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license.
or
None can love freedom but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license, which never hath more scope than under tyrants.

Craig R. Smith:
The idea that political speech had to be protected at any cost dates to Colonial days, during which the press and the public were not allowed to express themselves freely on matters of public concern. The King and his government often used restrictive measures, such as licensing of printing presses and the doctrine of seditious libel, to silence unfavorable public comment.

Jack C. Westman:
The denial or revocation of a parenting license would be expected to be a painful experience, particularly for mothers. The overall importance of protecting innocent children from incompetent parenting justifies the inconvenience to a few parents and the inevitable imperfections of a licensing system.
Jarret B. Wollstein:
In Washington, D.C. it costs $7,000 in city fees to open a pushcart. In California, up to eighty federal and state licenses are required to open a small business. In New York, a medallion to operate a taxicab costs $150,000. More than 700 occupations in the United States require a government license. Throughout the country, church soup kitchens for the homeless are being closed by departments of health. No wonder so many people turn to crime and violence to survive.
User avatar
notmartha
Posts: 735
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:16 pm

Re: License

Post by notmartha » Sun Nov 13, 2016 12:11 pm

A Christian Stand Against Licensure by Greg Loren: Durand

http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/cjsn_1-35.php#cs13
Editor's Note

Today, We at the Christian Jural Society News greet with open arms our Brother in Christ, Greg Loren: Durand, who has written the following article on "State Licensure," which We find, as We hope you will, most edifying. The basis of his argument centers around two basic tenets dear to Us, and All Brothers in Christ: One, "What is required to fulfill the Law?; And, Two, "By whose authority do the 'licensors' do the things they do?" The answers can be summed up in two Scripture verses.

Turning to Romans 13:8, The Apostle Paul writes to our Brothers at Rome: "Owe no man any thing, but to love one another; for he that loveth another, hath fulfilled the law." When you have fulfilled the Law of God, what other duty is there outside of the love which the Word of God addresses? Have you not done your duty already when you came to Christ, and had a renewing of your mind and heart? Everything else is an interposition between your Self and God. Thus, licensure is such an interposition, because it creates a new obligation to another outside of love, and God; and becomes an addition to the Word of God. Licensure is not love; licensure is loveless and lawless.

And to answer the second question, We need look no further than The Word of Our Sovereign Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, in John 3:17-18: "For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through Him might be saved. He that believeth on Him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

Can the condemned create law? Can one who believes in the limited reason of man found in Constitutions, proclamations, codes, rules, and regulations be fulfilling the Law of God? Greg Loren leaves no doubt to what the answer is!!!


The Biblical Truth of Christ's Present Reign

Scripture openly and without equivocation proclaims the rulership of the Lord Jesus Christ. Contrary to the Premillennial/Dispensational views which are so popular in modern Evangelicalism, this rulership is not limited to the future when Christ will allegedly return to earth to sit on a literal throne in Jerusalem. According to Psalm 2:8, the nations have been given to Christ by the Father as His inheritance. We are told that this inheritance went into effect at Christ's resurrection and ascension to the right hand of the Father (Psalm 2:7; Matthew 28:18; Acts 2:33-35, 13:33-34; I Corinthians 15:24-28; Ephesians 1:20-22; Hebrews 1:5, 8, 13). Consequently, "the kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever!" (Revelation 11:15b). This rulership is not spoken of in the future tense, but as an established fact in the heavenlies which will continue to manifest itself throughout history and into eternity:

"Of the increase of His government and peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, to order it and establish it with judgment and justice from that time forward, even forever." (Isaiah 9:7).
Contrary to the Amillennial position, this rulership of the Lord Jesus Christ is also not limited to the Church. The kingship of Christ over the nations implies much more than merely the preaching of the Gospel; it necessarily involves the implementation of His Law in society as a whole, for a king who does not require obedience from his subjects is certainly no true king. Returning to Psalm 2, we find that both kings (civil magistrates) and judges are instructed to "serve the LORD with fear" (verse 11) and to "kiss the Son, lest He be angry, and you perish in the way" (verse 12). Those civil rulers who rebel "against the LORD and against His Anointed" and "take counsel together" to "break Their bonds in pieces and cast away Their cords," are warned that Christ "shall break them with a rod of iron" and "shall dash them to pieces like a potter's vessel" (verse 9). There is no ethical neutrality in God's government; there is no middle ground between God's Law and man's law; there is no philosophical "cease fire" between the victorious and advancing Kingdom of Christ and the defeated and retreating kingdom of fallen men. The only terms that Christ offers the rulers of the vanquished nations is either unconditional surrender or utter destruction; there will be no prisoners of war when the battle is over.

Christians are Ambassadors of King Jesus

So how does the established reign of the Lord Jesus Christ over the nations relate to Good and Lawful Christian Men and Women who have been adopted as Heirs of the Father and made Citizens of His Kingdom? Christ's instructions to His Church in Matthew 28:18-20 gives us the answer:

"All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age."

The so-called "Great Commission" is firmly founded on the fact that Christ rules all nations in fullness of power here and now - in history. Christians are "deputized" by Christ in this passage and entrusted with His power and His authority. As "ambassadors of Christ" (2 Corinthians 5:20) and "good soldier[s] of Jesus Christ" (2 Timothy 2:3), we are to be actively involved in "mop up" operations in this world: in the heavenly realm, all things are already accounted as being placed "under His feet" (Ephesians 1:22; Hebrews 2:8); in the earthly realm, this spiritual fact is made an actual fact through the work of individual Christians in taking dominion over the earth in Christ's Name (Genesis 1:28). God has "raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Ephesians 2:6), and He has "made us kings and priests" with Christ (Revelation 1:6).

If we are deputies of Christ, who has conquered the nations, what does this have to say about our relationship to the current martial powers occupying this country? Do we surrender our legal status as "joint heirs with Christ" (Romans 8:17) and forfeit His Dominion for permits to do and to own those things which are already given to us by our Father? Are we to exchange, as did Esau, our birth right for a "morsel of food" (Hebrews 12:16)?

Psalm 24:1 states: "The earth is the LORD's and all its fullness, the world and those who dwell therein."
The LORD God through His Son Jesus Christ is the sole owner of all things, and even all people, in this world. His are "every beast of the forest... and the cattle on a thousand hills" (Psalm 50:10). His is the day and His is the night (Psalm 74:16). His is "the kingdom, the power and the glory forever" (Matthew 6:13). "He does whatever He pleases" (Psalm 115:3) with that which is His own, and He has graciously given us all things in Christ and instructed us to possess the land in His Name (Deuteronomy 1:8; Isaiah 57:13b). We are therefore the Caretakers of our Father's world and the Stewards of His possessions (Psalm 115:16).

In demanding licensure from Good and Lawful Christian Men and Women, the State is asking that we render to it the submission and tribute that Scripture requires us to give to God alone (Deuteronomy 6:13-14; Matthew 4:10). In its wicked rebellion, the modern State attempts to usurp the throne of the Lord Jesus Christ and sets itself up as the "gold image" to which all its subjects are expected to bow. However, we as servants of Christ need to realize that there is no neutrality in life; everything we do has an underlying religious implication. When we succumb to intimidation from the godless rulers of our time to submit our private property, our household pets, and even our children to licensure from the State, we are acting as if Christ the King no longer owns and rules over all things, but has been Himself vanquished by His enemies. Simply put, we are violating the very First Commandment, which tells us, "You shall have no other gods before Me" (Exodus 20:3).

The Ungodly State is a "Beast"

In the book of Revelation, the ungodly State is pictured as a "beast" which, in claiming for itself the prerogatives of God, is described as "speaking great things and blasphemies" (Revelation 13:5). The Christians of the first-century were under the military authority of Rome - a nation which openly proclaimed its rulers, the Caesars, to be divine. All those under the jurisdiction of Rome were required by law to publicly proclaim their allegiance to Caesar by burning a pinch of incense and declaring, "Caesar is Lord." Upon compliance with this law, the citizens and subjects were given a papyrus document called a "libellus," which they were required to present when either stopped by the Roman police or attempting to engage in commerce in the Roman marketplace. In this way, Roman society became, for all intents and purposes, closed to anyone not willing to adhere himself and his family to the established religion of Caesar-worship (statism). To be "a friend of the world" was, in a very real sense, to be "an enemy of God" (James 4:4b). This is the essence of Scripture's warnings to the early Christians against taking upon themselves the "mark of the beast":
"All who dwell on the earth will worship [the beast], whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world...

"He causes all, both small and great, rich or poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name...

If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand, he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever, and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.

Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus (Revelation 13:8, 16-17, 14:9b-12).

It should be remembered that "it was granted to [Caesar] to make war with the saints and to overcome them" (Revelation 13:7a). Our Brothers and Sisters were torn apart by wild animals in the Roman Coliseum and used as living candles in the gardens of Nero because they refused to offer up even a tiny pinch of incense in his name and proclaim that he, not Christ, was Lord. In essence, they refused to submit to licensure (permission) from the State to live and worship as God had commanded them.

Modern imperial America is very similar, in both its 'laws' and its social climate, to ancient imperial Rome. We are, as were the Christians of the first century, commanded by the godless "powers that be" to obtain the "mark of the beast" in our "right hand or forehead" by submitting to fictitious creation as commercial "persons" under the Fourteenth Amendment. We are confronted, as they were, with the increasing difficulty of "buying or selling" without Social Security enumeration, which is the modern "number of his name." It may very well be that our Lord has decreed that we shall soon suffer for His Crown and Covenant as did His servants before us and pay the ultimate price for our obedience. Because of this possibility, we would all do well to familiarize ourselves with the story of the three Hebrew youths in Daniel 3. They were, as we in America are today, subjects of the mightiest military power on earth. The pagan Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar, like our current Federal government, had proclaimed himself to be the only god to whom the people were to submit and had even set up a golden image to which they were commanded to bow in symbolic worship of his name. When brought before the king and threatened with death in a furnace of fire for their disobedience to this edict, their response was respectful yet unwavering:

"O Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter. If that is the case, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and He will deliver us from your hand, O king. But if not, let it be known to you, O king, that we do not serve your gods, nor will we worship the gold image which you have set up (Daniel 3:16b-18).

We as Good and Lawful Christian Men and Women are commanded by our Commander-in-Chief to be His witnesses before the nations (Isaiah 43:10; Matthew 10:32; Acts 1:8). Contrary to the proponents of the so-called "Patriot movement," we are not to be about the vain work of asserting our own personal sovereignty, but that of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is ***His*** flag which we are to follow and it is Citizenship in ***His*** State which we are to proclaim. In the faithful exercise of this duty, we are assured a great reward, if not in this life, then certainly in that which is to come. Though we may be persecuted by the haters of our Lord and even "beheaded for [our] witness to Jesus and for the word of God" (Revelation 20:4), we are not to "fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul" but rather "Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell" (Matthew 10:28).

Conclusion

Contrary once again to the secular patriotism ("Americanism") so prevalent in the tax-protest, state Citizenship, and sovereignty movements, America deserves to live on in history only if its people return to the Lord Jesus Christ and submit themselves once again to His Law. And since the Church is called to be "the salt of the earth" and "the light of the world" (Matthew 5:13-14), such will never happen until individual Christians begin to abandon their Federal benefits, revoke their licenses, forsake their corporations, and stand faithfully upon the promises of God's Word. A generation that is more enamored with the "cradle to grave" guarantees of "Egypt" than with the challenges of "the Promised Land" ahead, is a generation which God will judge and whose "corpses [will fall] in the wilderness" (Hebrews 3:17). Our King asks of such a people, "[Y]ou lift up your eyes toward your idols.... Should you then possess the land?" (Ezekiel 33:25). May the Lord grant that our children will remember us as those who stood as bold champions for the Crown Rights of King Jesus rather than those who grovelled at the feet of His enemies for a handout.

Let us conclude by returning once again to Psalm 2: "Why do the nations rage, and the people plot a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD and against His Anointed, saying, "Let us break Their bonds in pieces and cast away Their cords from us."

"He who sits in the heavens shall laugh: the LORD shall hold them in derision. Then He shall speak to them in His wrath, and distress them in His deep displeasure." (Psalm 2:1-5).
Post Reply