Question 11: Application of the Authorized King James Bible and the Oath of Allegiance, its use in Oath of Office, and giving of evidence within the Judicial Systems.

Answer 11: Every Senator, Representative, Minister, Judge, Magistrate, Policy Enforcer, Governor, Premier and Members of State Parliament are obligated to take an Oath of Allegiance and Oath of Office before sitting in Office.

The Promissory Oaths Act 1868 at Section 7 and Section 11 is very clear in that without Oath of Office in accordance with law, that office is not attended and the holder is to vacate office immediately.

The Amended Practice Direction Number 9 of 2020 for the Supreme Court of Queensland is very clear at Point 1 wherein it states that Applicants wishing to take an oath must bring their own Bibles for that purpose.

It is clear through the Schedule Oath of Allegiance in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act July 1900 that this is under the blessing of Almighty God where in the last words of the Schedule Oath are “so Help me God”.  It is also clear by the Schedule Oath to the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act July 1900 that a line of authority is defined that matches the Preamble to that Act.

The Authorized King James Bible being the Will and Testamony of the Son, the Father and the Holy Spirit defines the raising of land from International Waters (Genesis 1:9), wherein the Moral Compass of Shushan (Book of Esther) defines the Christ Star of Bethlehem (Esther) as the birth star of the Commonwealth of Australia.

The Shrine of Remembrance in Melbournes Kings Domain defines the Kingdom of Australia at which King George V by Proclomation defined in Royal Style and Title 1927 seperation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland into the Dominions of Great Britain, Ireland, and the British Dominions across the seas.  Imperial Conference 1926 defined the Sovereignty of the Commonwealth of Australia Post Armistice of the Great War 1914-1918 wherein the Commonwealth of Australia did come to Peace in International Waters.

It is in this lineage that under Clause 5 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act July 1900 that the Supreme Court of Queensland, and the lower courts of Summary Jurisdiction of Public Acts and Record, are beholden to a limited capacity of rule of law wherein it states that all laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia under the Constitution, shall be binding on the courts, judges and people of every State and of every part of the Commonwealth, notwisthstanding any laws of any State.

It is also clear that under Section 108 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution that the law of the States of the Commonwealth subject to this Constitution continue in force in the State until provision is made in that behalf by the Parliament of the Commonwealth.  It is also clear that the Parliament of the State shall have such powers of alteration and of repeal with no mention of creation of Common laws.

After the States had their Great Seals of the Colonies removed, the body politic of the Commonwealth of Australia was the overseeing power of the people for their Public Servants.  Public Seals of the States can only seal Public Act and Record which is used to regulate the Public Service and the Public Servants of the Commonwealth of Australia.

It is the Magistrate and the Police that are obligated to the Public Acts and Records of the State, and is within Summary Jurisdiction that this occurs.  The People of the Commonwealth of Australia are beholden to the Supreme Laws of God being the Royal Law in the Scripture (James 2:8) wherein they are advised not to have respect for persons (James 2:9).

When the Colony of Van Diemans Land was settled, the Prison Colony saw to sitting Subjects of the Crown before Summary Jurisdiction giving them the option to be heard by Police Magistrate within the Prison Colony or sail  to Sydney to be heard before a Jury of their Peers.  Most subjects saw the trip to Sydney as an arduous journey involving heavy suffering with a nine month turnaround to return to the island we now know as Tasmania. Many subjects chose to be heard before Summary Jurisdiction within the Prison instead of taking on this journey to Sydney to be heard within proper jurisdiction.

It is clear by the history of this Commonwealth of Australia and the Colonial Governance that came before the unity of the People in a Federal Commonwealth of Australia that Law was separate from Public Act and Record, and that Summary Jurisdiction is relative to the latter.  Prisoners of the Colony of Van Diemans land had no right to transport to Sydney to be heard before a competent court of jurisdiction.

For centuries, magistrates have dispensed justice in England relying on the Bible to force people to tell the truth.  Its moral force was unquestioned, placing intense pressure on witnesses to tell the truth.  The oath, still sworn by witnesses and defendants as they hold a holy book, has given the English language one of its most familiar sentences.

"I swear by Almighty God [to tell] the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."

Within the State of Queensland the Oath is defined within the Oaths Act 1867 where in it states the following:

“The evidence which you shall give to the court and jury sworn touching the matters in question between the parties shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth So held you God”

A question asked by the court of competent jurisdiction to a witness to give evidence.

The Oath of Allegiance, Oath of Office and Witnesses Oaths in Civil, Criminal and Voire Dire circumstances stems from the Holy Scripture wherein at 1 Kings 2:43 it states “Why then hast thou not kept the oath of the LORD, and the commandment that I have charged thee with?”, which is followed in 1Kings 8:31-32 with “If any man trespass against his neighbor, and an oath be laid upon him to cause him to swear, and the oath come before thine alter in this house: then hear thou in heaven, and do, and judge thy servants, condemning the wicked, to bring his way upon his head; and justifying the righteous, to give him according to his righteousness.”

We can ascertain from the Holy Scripture that the Oath of Allegiance, and that of Office stems from the blessing of Almighty God relative to the land claim being raised out of international waters.

Matthew 5:33-37, and again in James 5:12 goes on to advise that one can confound their oath in ignorance by taking oath on the holy scripture after their initial oath and are advised that their yes be yes and their no be no.  To swear oath within the court may indeed confound ones allegiance if it is outside of the line of authority in the initial oath taken.

It is clear from the Holy Scripture that the blessing of Almighty God defined in the Kings Domain wherein the Shrine of Remembrance defines the Holy Ground of the Commonwealth of Australia has a lineage defined by the Schedule and Preamble in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act July 1900.  To obscure this line of authority would put one at the risk of serving two masters (Matthew 6:24) and at the peril of their own life with regards to their inheritance under the gods of their fathers (Judges 2:12, Romans 6:14).

The removal, or non compliance with the Oath of Allegiance, Oath of Office and the requirement to be under Oath to give evidence leads to the ignorance and destruction of Gods Kingdom at which 62,000 men sacrificed their lives so the people of Australia could stand on the Land of their Fathers in the seas of International Waters.

Conclusion 11: The Oath of Allegiance, Oath of Office and the requirement to be under Oath to give evidence is part of the law and custom of the Commonwealth of Australia in the lineage of the motherland of England wherein under the Crown of Australia there is by oath a requirement by the Monarch to uphold that law and custom by promise and not moral obligation.

At that promise to uphold the Royal Law in the Scripture (James 2:8) not only to the blessing of Almighty God lifting the land up from the waters (Genesis 1:9) but also the custom of the people that united under God to give by their right foundation to the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act July 1900 through Debates of Federation thereby making man in their own image.

The Holy Scripture and the Oath are intertwined at the core of law and is customary within the Commonwealth of Australia.  To change, or remove any such Oath would be to undermine the custom of the people in which our lineage is defined.

The Oath of Allegiance is forged out of the Holy Scripture defining the line of authority being God, Jesus Christ and the Prophets to form Holy Ground through the Gods of our Fathers at which they did sacrifice their life and limb for our freedom.