The penalty of perjury oath on your 1040 Form is an oath prohibited for Christians.

A PERJURY OATH IS ALWAYS A RELIGIOUS CEREMONY

The penalty of perjury oath on your 1040 Income tax form is an oath prohibited for Christians.

Including perjury oaths on forms.

Hands often symbolize an oath. Examples: Genesis 14:22, Ezek 17:18, Ezek 36:7 and Dan 12:7. And so it is to this very day; an oath is performed with your right hand raised. An oath is always a religious ritual. Your Bible prohibits taking an oath to a pagan state god. A perjury oath is a religious ritual. The SS5 Form to get a SS Number is signed under the Penalty of Perjury (although there is no longer a written oath above the signature).

Christians are advised not to take oaths in James 5:12 and Matthew 5:33-34, but if you must take an oath, take oaths only to superiors (Hebrews 6:16). You are subordinate to whomever you take an oath.

When taking oaths to your superiors, you must invoke the authority of God. You cannot invoke the Lord's name for evil intent, which would include a false oath, or bearing false witness.

Pagans take oaths to someone higher than themselves - their god. Your Bible prohibits taking an oath to their god, or to any pagan state. If your Bible can call Satan a god (2nd Corinthians 4:4) then your government can too. And, by the way, the words "In God we Trust" did not appear on all your money until 1955.

It wasn't until March 13, 1878 that oaths were even allowed in federal courts (Chapter 37, 20 Statute 30). It was entirely voluntary, and the accused had to actually request to take an oath. Everything is backwards now. Refusing to swear to their god is contempt of court and a presumption of guilt. Contempt of court can land you in jail for the rest of your life, without a trial of any kind.

There was a time in your once-great nation where swearing an oath to God that you were innocent, called an oath of purgation, would put an immediate halt to any criminal proceedings against you. This is based on Hebrews 6:16: "Men swear by someone greater than themselves, and the oath confirms what is said and puts an end to all argument." The government cannot gain jurisdiction over their masters. They only had jurisdiction over those who submit to them. What part don't you understand? What form did you sign to submit to them?

An affirmation is the same as an oath, except it omits a reference to God. It is for atheists. See Torcaso v. Maryland 367 US 488. Christians cannot affirm, nor swear oaths.

I recommend the book "The Oath or Affirmation" by Robert Hallstrom. [Gospel Ministry Publications, P.O. Box 9411, Boise Idaho 83707]

The penalty of perjury oath on your 1040 Form is an oath prohibited for Christians.

When the Commissioner of IRS says income tax is a system of "voluntary compliance," those words are based on the actions of the Quaker movement hundreds of years ago. You can’t be compelled to take an oath or claim a false oath: it is purely voluntary. A compelled oath is automatically a false oath. A false oath is an automatic perjury. If you are going to claim a false oath, you’ll have to do it voluntarily.
You can refuse to sign a form 1040 only by reason of conscience. Conscience means "with knowledge." You know you’ve not taken an oath of office. Now you know you aren’t subject to the "penalties of perjury." Truth is, you aren’t subject to penalties of perjury; truth is what sets men free.
A freeman is subject to no human power. The opposite of subject is "object." You aren’t a "protestor." You’re an "objector." Protests may fall on deaf ears, but an objection based on reason of conscience, your own conscience, cannot be overlooked or overruled. A conscientious objection to an oath, be it true or false, is a claim of the rational order of God – man – government. A judge who overrules your conscience places himself in the position of your master. But that position is already occupied. The judge is in deep trouble.

Here's the good news for those with eyes to see.

June 9, 2006

1040 Checkmate?

DOJ Dismisses Felony Tax Prosecution
-- With Prejudice -- After PRA Defense Raised

Evidence OMB Complicit In Income Tax Fraud

DOJ & IRS Petitioned To Explain


On May 12, 2006 in Peoria, Illinois, the attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) begged the court to dismiss all charges against IRS victim Robert Lawrence in federal District Court.

The motion for dismissal came on the heels of a surprise tactic by Lawrence’s defense attorney Oscar Stilley.

The tactic threatened exposure of IRS’s on-going efforts to defraud the public. The move put DOJ attorneys in a state of panic that left them with only one alternative: beg for dismissal, with prejudice.

Stilley’s tactic paid off. Sixty days earlier, the DOJ had indicted Lawrence on three counts of willful failure to file a 1040 form, and three felony counts of income tax evasion. The federal Judge dismissed all charges with prejudice, meaning the DOJ cannot charge Lawrence with those crimes again.

The trial was to have started on Monday morning, May 15th.

On Wednesday, May 10, Stilley mailed a set of documents to the DOJ in response to DOJ’s discovery demands. The documents revealed to DOJ for the first time that Lawrence was basing his entire defense on an act of Congress, 44 U.S.C. 3500 – 3520, also known as the "Paperwork Reduction Act" (PRA).

In Section 3512 of the Act, titled "Public Protection," it says that no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with an agency’s collection of information request (such as a 1040 form), if the request does not display a valid control number assigned by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in accordance with the requirements of the Act, or if the agency fails to inform the person who is to respond to the collection of information that he is not required to respond to the collection of information request unless it displays a valid control number.

In Section 3512 Congress went on to authorize that the protection provided by Section 3512 may be raised in the form of a complete defense at any time during an agency’s administrative process (such as an IRS Tax Court or Collection and Due Process Hearing) or during a judicial proceeding (such as Lawrence’s criminal trial).

In sum, the PRA requires that all government agencies display valid OMB control numbers and certain disclosures directly on all information collection forms that the public is requested to file. Lawrence's sole defense was he was not required to file an IRS Form 1040 because it displays an invalid OMB control number.

Government officials knew that if the case went to trial, it would expose the fraudulent, counterfeit 1040. They also must have known that a trial would expose the ongoing conspiracy between OMB and IRS to publish 1040 forms each year that those agencies knew were in violation of the PRA. That would raise the issue that the Form 1040, with its invalid control number, is being used by the Government to cover up the underlying constitutional tort -- that is, the enforcement of a direct, unapportioned tax on the labor of every working man, women and child in America.

Any information collection form, such as IRS Form 1040, which lacks bona fide statutory authority or which conflicts with the Constitution, cannot be issued an OMB control number. If a control number were issued for such a form, the form would be invalid and of no force and effect.

Under the facts and circumstances of the last 24 years, it is safe to say that IRS Form 1040 is a fraudulent, counterfeit, bootleg form. Government officials responsible for this fraud should be investigated and face indictment for willfully making and sponsoring false instruments.

Caught between a rock and a hard place, the DOJ and IRS decided not to let the Lawrence case proceed because it would reveal one critical and damning fact:

The PRA law protects those that fail to file IRS bootleg Form 1040

The DOJ knew that it stood a significant chance of losing the case, and if that happened, the press and others would quickly spread the word, and leave only fools to ever file a 1040 again. Oscar Stilley’s pleadings and documents made these points quite clear:

IRS Form 1040 violates the federal Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and is therefore a legally invalid form.

Under the Public Protection clause of the PRA, no person can be penalized for failing to file a 1040 if the IRS fails to fully comply with the PRA.

The PRA statutes explicitly provide that a PRA challenge is a complete defense and can be raised in any administrative or judicial proceeding.

The IRS Individual Form 1040 has not and cannot comply with the requirements of the PRA because no existing statute authorizes the IRS to impose or collect the federal income tax from individuals. That lack of bona fide authority makes it impossible for IRS to avoid violating the PRA.
We The People Foundation has researched the facts, law and circumstances surrounding this case, and has determined that:

A public trial would have opened a “Pandora’s Box” of legal evidence and government testimony under oath that would establish the IRS 1040 form as both fraudulent and counterfeit.

Oscar Stilley’s PRA defense “checkmated” the DOJ and IRS

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) appears to have been complicit with IRS in deceiving the public and in helping perpetuate the 1040 fraud by promulgating federal regulations that negate the plain language of the PRA laws passed by Congress and by allowing the IRS to continually skirt the explicit requirements of those statutes

What about "Reprove the unfruitful works of darkness?"

No judgement by me just providing the facts and as far as division goes how do you explain denominationalism ?

Does God's word say "swear not at all?" Or does it say "swear not" except when the IRS says so.

Greetings in the name of Our Lord and Savior, Jesus the Christ!
I agree with your comments Candle Glow. "Advice" and a "command" are two different things. I don't recall where I found this article but if you google "Christians and oaths" you will find plenty of information. Some of the info you will find tries to justify the swearing of an oath despite God's clear prohibition. Other sites speak the truth concerning the subject. Those are the ones I agree with. Thank you for pointing out the error in the excerpt I posted. Jesus never had to use lengthy explanations to get His point across. He spoke plainly and simply and you don't need a law degree to understand Him. I love the simplicity of Christ! He said what He meant and He meant what He said. "Swear NOT ANY oaths. Plain and simple. I find it most interesting that this truth is prefaced at James 5:12 with the words , "But above all things........swear not......" God bless you Candle Glow

candle glow said:

Hey Tom, Greetings to you too! I think the "swear not at all" teaching is view by most Christians as one of those "kooky" teachings of Jesus which they've come to feel that he never meant for us to take seriously.

I think they do this precisely because it can be quite an inconvenience not to make promises, so they excuse the command as unrealistic.

Click to expand...

Agree! The sad part is that Believers especially and unbelievers alike are deceived by the IRS into believing that the income tax is mandatory when in fact it is voluntary. Believers take biblically prohibited oaths to finance wickedness when the law doesn't require it. In the words of the prophet Hosea, "My people perish for lack of knowledge."

Americans work approximately 107 days a year, from January 1 to April 17, just to pay their income taxes. One third of the year people finance the US government, that does NOTHING in the name of Jesus, admittedly some good and plenty of evil. As believers I must ask what fellowship hath light with darkness, avoid even the appearance of evil, and be ye Holy? Art thou called being a servant? Care not for it: but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather.......Ye are bought with a price; be not ye the servants of men. 1 Corinthians 21-23. Income taxes are voluntary. Learn the truth......if thou mayest be free, use it rather.
I like your analogy of the counterfeit. We are to give out of love, not force. Why do people find it so hard to believe the IRS is a master of deception?
One more thing...... Please define "reasonable" for what is reasonable for one man may not be reasonable for another. Thanks for your post Candle Glow. I appreciate your wisdom!