How the Battle Between Common Law and Law Merchant Shapes Our Legal System Today.

Have you ever wondered why the legal system seems so baffling and contradictory? Imagine you’re a citizen trying to navigate the maze of laws and courts, only to find yourself tangled in a web of confusion where it feels like no one’s really telling you the whole truth. This isn’t just your experience—it’s part of a much larger, ancient struggle that’s been simmering since the days of Nimrod. This battle pits two monumental systems of law against each other: the Biblical Common Law and the Roman Civil Law, also known as the Law Merchant.

Let’s start with a historical backdrop. According to some intriguing theories, the Civil War wasn’t primarily about slavery, as often portrayed. Instead, it was a clash over whether the United States should adopt a National Bank to issue negotiable instruments under international law—thus bringing the people under a form of global control. The North, with its burgeoning industrial ambitions, wanted to impose a central credit bank.

Meanwhile, the agrarian South resisted, valuing their independence and existing economic practices. This economic struggle was masked by the more sensational narrative of slavery, which was used to stir up civil unrest and achieve broader financial and political objectives.

After the war, the Radical Republicans seized the opportunity to reshape the country’s legal framework. They passed amendments and laws that expanded Congress’s powers, changing how legal and financial systems operated. The 13th and 14th Amendments, for instance, increased federal control and laid the groundwork for what many believe to be a system deeply intertwined with the Law Merchant. This system is based on negotiable instruments—essentially paper notes that represent debt rather than real value. Over time, this approach concentrated economic power in a few hidden hands, giving rise to a system where debts are discharged with paper rather than being paid in tangible value.

Fast forward to today, and we find ourselves living under a legal and financial framework that many argue is divorced from its constitutional roots. Courts and legal systems have transitioned from common law, which is grounded in tangible, moral principles and individual responsibility, to the Law Merchant, which operates on negotiable paper and international regulations. The Law Merchant’s dominance means that rather than paying debts in real currency, people and governments are merely discharging them with paper notes that are ultimately unredeemable.

Churches, too, are not immune from this shift. Many religious institutions, steeped in modern legal and financial practices, have become entangled in the very system they might have once opposed. The exchange of substance for paper—like trading gold for worthless notes—has even infiltrated spiritual practices. It’s a stark departure from a biblical approach to law and morality, which would prioritize tangible, substantive transactions over abstract financial instruments.

This complex struggle extends globally, often manifesting in political and social conflicts that might seem unrelated to legal theories. For instance, the strife in Ireland or the tumult in South America isn’t just about religion or politics; it’s also a continuation of this deep-seated conflict between different legal and financial systems.

In summary, our current legal and financial systems are heavily influenced by the Law Merchant, which has shifted focus from the constitutional Common Law to a model centered around negotiable instruments and international regulations. This shift has profound implications for how justice is served and how financial transactions are handled. Understanding this backdrop helps explain why the legal system can feel so opaque and why it often seems to operate against the principles of transparency and fairness.

Content sourced from this PDF document.