authorityresearch.com

"Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths." Proverb. 3: 5-6

The Institution for Authority Research

About, Issues, Articles, Booklet, Schedule, Material, Scheduling, Audios, Radio, Sources, Textus Receptus, Class, Warnings, Thanks! P.S.

deangotcher@gmail.com.

   Instead of children humbling, denying, controlling, disciplining themselves, under their parent's/God's authority, reproving, correcting, rebuking themselves and others when they disobey, through their use of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "self 'justification,'" i.e., through their participation in the consensus process in the classroom, they are disregarding, questioning, challenging, disobeying, disrespecting, dishonoring, defying, and/or attacking authority instead, doing what they want to do, when they want to do it with no guilty conscience for doing "wrong," tolerating, participating in, and/or promoting, i.e., serving and protecting deviancy, depravity, and debauchery, engendering a culture of unrighteousness and abomination—requiring a police state to maintain order. The 'logic' of dialectic 'reasoning' goes like this: If you want to 'change' the world, i.e., if you want to 'create' a world of 'change,' you can not start with the parents, i.e., with their authority, i.e., with their restraints, i.e., with that which is "of and for" the "past," i.e., with that which inhibits or blocks 'change,' including the guilty conscience for doing wrong, you have to start with the children, i.e., with their carnal nature, i.e., with their desire for the pleasures of the 'moment' (which includes the "super-ego," i.e., the child's "feelings" of the 'moment'—used to determine right from wrong in the 'moment') and their dissatisfaction with restraint, i.e., with that which is "of and for" the present and the future, i.e., with that which engenders 'change,' The "old" world order of "top-down" authority, with fathers ruling over their children, has been supplanted with a "new" world order of so called "equality," with facilitators of 'change' seducing, deceiving, and manipulating the children (as natural-human resource) for their own pleasure and gain. Hebrews 12:5-11, i.e., the father's/Father's authority system and Romans 7:14-25, i.e., the guilty conscience for doing wrong has been supplanted with Genesis 3:1-6, i.e., the dialectic process, i.e., the system of John 2:15b, Luke 16:15, and Proverbs 16:5, i.e., of "human nature," "self 'justification,'" and the "consensus process," with children doing wrong without having a guilty conscience., i.e., with "no fear of God before their eyes." (Romans 3:18)
   "The heart," i.e., the affective domain is "deceitful above all things" and "desperately wicked." In other words, with the child deceived in his thinking, thinking that since the pleasure of the 'moment' "feels" so good, it must be the standard for "good" itself, he becomes wicked in his thinking, thinking that the negation of whatever or whoever inhibits or blocks the pleasure of the 'moment' is "good" as well. The heart is as "Pandora's box," a container full of evil, which, once opened, i.e., once 'liberated' from parental/Godly restraint, can not be closed again.
   It is not that God and parents are against pleasure. It is that when pleasure becomes more important to the child than doing what the parent commands—doing right and not wrong—when it lies outside, i.e., is antithetical to the realm of the parent's domain, i.e., establishing itself over and therefore against the restraints of authority, it becomes "lust" ("covetousness"), i.e., the catalyst for deceitfulness (with the child following after anyone or anything engendering, 'justifying,' and/or offering it) and wickedness (producing hatred in the child's heart toward authority, i.e., toward anyone inhibiting or blocking the child from having it in the 'moment,' i.e., from having his way), i.e., it becomes the catalyst for 'change.' With the child's ability to 'justify' it, i.e., using dialectic 'reasoning' to "'justify' himself" ("self" loves pleasure), pleasure becomes the standard for "right," i.e., for "good" itself, turning good, i.e., doing right and not wrong (according to the parent's and/or God commands and rules) into evil and evil, i.e., "lusting" after the pleasure of the 'moment' (negating anyone who inhibits or blocks it) into "good." Becoming "righteous" "in and for himself," thinking himself invincible, as a god, nothing, in the mind of the child, becomes impossible that he sets his mind to do, i.e., that he imagines, especially if it is done collectively with others of like mind. "We working for Us" is a gnostic construct, especially when the affective domain, i.e., the consensus process is involved. It is the parent's chastening of the child (for doing wrong) that reveals to the child that he is not god. The same is true for man—when God chastens him.
   Dialogue is the activity of the child's mind where the child 'liberates' himself from the father's authority system, i.e., where he 'justifies' to himself his "hearts desires," i.e., his desires of the 'moment' (for pleasure and the approval of others) and dissatisfactions (with restraint and the restrainer), 'liberating' himself from having a guilty conscience for doing wrong. With his imagination—role-playing his heart's carnal desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment,' he is able to 'create' a world of his own making, out of his own carnal nature, 'liberating' himself from the father's authority for the 'moment,' establishing himself over and therefore against the father's authority system.
   The trickery of the dialectic (dialogue) process is: by pulling those of the father's authority system into dialogue (in their effort to be "fare"), those of the father's authority system end up loosing (abdicating their authority), since the father's authority system has no footing in the process of dialogue. You preach and teach truth, meditating upon it, not 'changing' it but letting it change you. To dialogue it with yourself and with others turns it into an opinion, making it subject to 'change,' i.e., subject to your (and others) "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., subject to your "sensuous needs" ("felt needs") of the 'moment' (and the "sensuous needs" of the 'moment' of others), which includes not only your (and their) desire for pleasure but your (and their) desire for "affirmation," i.e., approval as well, making it subject to your (and their) "sense perception," i.e., opinion of the 'moment,' which is subject to the situation of the 'moment' and anyone manipulating it, i.e., selecting the "appropriate information" to talk about, guaranteeing the desired outcome, i.e., the negation of the preaching and teaching of truth, thereby 'liberating' the mind from having a guilty conscience for doing wrong.
   Incapable of comprehending the "joy unspeakable" and the "the peace of God, which passeth all understanding," which comes from knowing the Lord Jesus Christ, those of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., facilitators of 'change' can only see life under God's authority as being a life of pain, of "repression" and "alienation," as a man holding onto the edge of a cliff, looking up (hoping) for someone to save him. Those of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., facilitator's of 'change' say quit looking up, i.e., quite looking for a savior, other than in yourself and in those of like disposition (with them, i.e., facilitator's of 'change' "helping" counsel you), let go (along with them), and "enjoy" the fall. "And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." "... the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth;" (Genesis 6:5; 8:21) "Rejoice, O young man, in thy youth; and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thine heart, and in the sight of thine eyes: but know thou, that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment." Ecclesiastes 11:9 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 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. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God." John 3:16-21

   I knew (discerned) that something was wrong with my teacher training when I earned my teaching degree (certification) forty-five years ago (during the time when classroom curriculum was 'changing' from teachers teaching facts to students to where teachers were becoming 'change' agents, i.e., facilitators of 'change,' "encouraging" students to dialogue their feelings or opinions with one another, 'liberating' their affective domain in the classroom, negating their respect for authority, i.e., 'liberating' them from their parent's authority in the home, engendering 'change'). After attending seminary (which was more about man's opinion of God's Word, i.e., weighting God's Word on the scale of man's "felt needs," i.e., his carnal desires of the 'moment,' making God's Word subject to the opinions of men rather than living by "every word which proceedeth from the mouth of God," i.e., weighing the Word of God with the Word of God, thus weighing man's thoughts and deeds from it, making man subject to God and His Word), working construction for twenty-five years (where facts matter), and taking university classes on European history, focusing mainly on the French and Russian revolutions as well as on Fascism, and what engendered them—[FYI, Fascism, i.e., "National" socialism is an offshoot of "Global" socialism, i.e., common-ism aka Communism. "Global" socialism was in essence hijacked by "National" socialists. While socialism itself, whether "Local," "National," or "Global" in intent, is based upon man's desire for pleasure and dissatisfaction with restraint—which is common with all men, which therefore can be used to engender unity amongst men—"Global" socialist's agenda is to unite men by "encouraging" them to work together in 'liberating' themselves from the "repressive" system of traditional "top-down," "right-wrong" authority, along with its commands and rules which are to be obeyed without question and its facts and truth which is to be accepted as is, by faith, which divides, i.e., which "alienates" man from himself, others, and the world, thus inhibiting or blocking unity, preventing 'change.' "Global" socialist's base a persons worth or values upon their way of thinking and acting, with their worth or value increasing as their thoughts and action ("theory and practice") become progressively the same, i.e., of nature only. "National" socialists, on the other hand, base a persons worth or value upon their ethnicity, i.e., good genes vs. bad genes and their loyalty to National causes, a "us vs. them," i.e., "in-group - out-group," i.e., "lander - ausländer" way of thinking and acting (or so it is taught, the truth being "The love of money is the root ...."). All forms of socialism, whether "Local," "National," or "Global" must negate the father's authority in the home in order to initiate and sustain control over "the people." "Global" socialists, in error (generalizing that the traditional family and National government are one and the same in structure, negating gemeinschaft, i.e., neighborhood, i.e., autonomous families in a community, i.e., private family, property, and business, replacing it with gesellschaft, i.e., society, i.e., with all individuals united as one in consent, i.e., with "feelings"), claim that when the German fathers turned to the National government to protect their traditional authority system, i.e., to protect their traditional way of doing things from the "Globalists," they created Fascism, i.e.., "National" socialism. This is still the paranoia of Globalists today, fearing that the father's of the nation might turn to a national leader, i.e., "Nationalism" to protect them from Globalism, engendering Fascism again. While "National" socialist's gained control of the curriculum of the classroom and used education to replace the father's authority with the Fuhrer, Global socialists use education, 'changing' the curriculum in order to negate the children's respect for their father's "top-down," "right-wrong" authority system instead, weakening, if not destroying the traditional families structure in order to cut off the potential of Fascism, i.e., "National" socialism, with its "father figure," rising up again, cutting off the "Global" socialists agenda to control the world for themselves. I know, TMI but it does explain the issue of immigration, i.e., legal vs. illegal for example, if you are willing to think it through]—and philosophy (focusing especially on Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, who believed that the "absolute" comes from the child, whose nature is to approach pleasure and avoid pain, and not the father, whose system of authority insists that children do right and not wrong, according to his standards), I spent five years (on my own) researching the dialectic 'process,' reading over 600 social-psychology books (many of which are required reading for a PhD in philosophy, sociology, psychology, anthropology, education, administration, etc., I do know my subject). I then taught at a university (an upper four hundred level class) on the people who brought the method of 'change' from Europe to American, using it to 'change' America(ns), i.e., using the consensus process to negate the father's authority in the feelings, thoughts, and actions of the child, and in his (or her) relationship with himself (herself), others, and the world, with educators, i.e., facilitators of 'change,' i.e., psychotherapist, i.e., Transformational Marxists, i.e., globalists using Kurt Lewin's

1). "force field analysis"—finding out where along the continuum or spectrum of 'change' your child resides (or you, your spouse, senator, etc., resides, the same process works in the workplace, government, church, etc., as well) in the 'moment,' in order to predict whether your child will be willing to 'change' in a given situation in the future, i.e., whether he is "tolerant of ambiguity," i.e., tolerant of deviancy, letting "feelings," i.e., 'change,' i.e., deviance have its way or whether he is "intolerant of ambiguity," i.e., intolerant of deviancy, insisting upon doing right and not wrong according to standards which you have taught him in the past, insists upon applying them in the present and future, inhibiting or blocking 'change,' i.e., deviancy; in other words, "force field analysis" grades your child along a spectrum of whether he is more 'loyal' to the commands, rules, facts, and truth (which you teach him) that restrains him, i.e., which are "alien" to his nature, inhibiting or blocking him from satisfying his carnal desires of the 'moment,' with him accepting your authority to chasten him for disobeying or for doing wrong, along with him accepting your authority to cast out those who disregard, disrespect, question, challenge, defy and/or attack your authority as a parent (a system or way of feeling, thinking, acting and relating with self, others, and the world as well as responding to authority, i.e., having faith in, honoring, and obeying authority, known as a Patriarchal Paradigm, i.e. the father's/Father's authority system of doing right and not wrong, i.e., an "either-or" system, chastening those who do wrong and casting out those who insist upon doing wrong, in order to initiate and sustain the "old" world order of "top-down" authorityaccording to those possessed with the dialectic process of 'change,' a "negative force field," inhibiting or blocking 'change') or whether your child is more 'loyal' to those who's feelings, thoughts, and actions, and relationship with themselves, others, and the world are in line with his carnal desires of the 'moment,' i.e., desiring pleasure and resenting restraint as he does, i.e., resenting that system which inhibits or blocks him from having the pleasures of the 'moment' he desires, fearing the pain of not only missing out on the pleasures of the 'moment,' which both he and they desire, but also missing out on the pleasure which comes from their approval of him, i.e., fearing being rejected by them if he holds them accountable to a "right-wrong" way of thinking and acting—tell a friend or someone you want as a friend, what they are doing, or are thinking about doing, is wrong, something they really want to do, and see how relationship is going—with the child from then on progressively moving in the direction of desiring approval from "the group" rather than doing right and "not wrong" according to pre-learned commands, rules, facts, and truth of the "past," i.e., "justifying himself, i.e., 'justifying' his carnal nature, i.e., his carnal desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' by finding approval from other children of like desires and dissatisfactions," finding "common-ism" with them, therefore "building relationship with them based upon 'self interests' which he finds he has in common with them" (a system or way of feeling, thinking, and acting, and relating with self, others, and the world, as well as responding to authority, i.e., disregarding, questioning, challenging, disrespecting, disobeying, defying, dishonoring, and/or attacking authority, known as a Heresiarchal Paradigm, where the child's carnal system of approaching pleasure and avoiding pain becomes the focus of life, i.e., where the child's "freedom" of expression is "tolerated," know as a Matriarchal Paradigm, allowing the child to begin the process of 'change,' then with the "help," i.e., the "encouragement" of a facilitator of 'change,' transforming his way of feeling, thinking, acting, and relating with himself, others, and the world, as well as how he responds to authority, i.e., i.e., disregarding, questioning, challenging, disrespecting, disobeying, defying, dishonoring, and/or attacking authority, learning to use dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "self 'justification,'" in order to 'justify' his carnal desires of the 'moment,' along with the carnal desires of others, becoming "at-one-with" them, i.e., uniting himself with them, and them with him, according to the desires and dissatisfactions, i.e., "self interests" they have in common in the 'moment,' establishing his and their "new" way of thinking and acting, i.e., his and their "new" world order [replacing the father's "top-down" authority system with the facilitator of 'change's' system of "equality," "helping" the children 'liberate' themselves from their parent's authority] over and therefore against the Patriarchal Paradigm, i.e., when children, 'driven' by pleasure, are able to 'justify' their "lust" for pleasure, making the 'purpose' of life the augmentation of pleasure, they are able, through their use of dialectic 'reasoning,' to 'justify' the praxis or social action of negating the Patriarchal paradigm, i.e., removing "right-wrong," "either-or" thinking from their lives and the lives of others, i.e., "annihilating" that system which engenders pain, i.e., that system which inhibits or blocks them from having the pleasures they desire in the 'moment,' i.e., the idea or "logic" of the Heresiarch Paradigm is: if children, who are naturally 'driven' by pleasure, are able to 'justify' their desire for pleasure, then the augmentation of pleasure becomes the 'purpose' of life, requiring the negation of those who insist upon the child doing right and not wrong according to their standards, inhibiting or blocking pleasure, i.e., in brief, augmenting pleasure requires negating any authority system which inhibits or blocks it—this is a "positive force field" according to those who embrace the dialectic process of 'change,' i.e., when you dialogue your opinion, i.e., your feelings and thoughts, i.e., your desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' with others, or when you refuse to participate instead, preaching commands and rules to be obeyed, without question [i.e., without question authority that is, with "Why" being asked in regard to facts and truth and not regarding commands and rules], and teaching facts and truth to be accepted as is, by faith, you reveal your preferred "force field" of the 'moment,' i.e., where you reside on the spectrum of 'change' in the 'moment,' your movement in one direction or the other, i.e., with you either 'compromising' your standards in the current situation [to be silent in the midst of 'compromise' is to 'compromise'], for the sake of initiating and sustaining relationship with others, or refusing to 'compromise,' your are willing to loose relationship with others, because doing right and not wrong is more important, determines your worth or value, i.e., your, or your child's, grade for the day—being graded along the spectrum of 'change,' according to your adaptability to 'change,' your willingness to 'compromise' your principles for the sake of "the group," engendering "social-ist" harmony and "world-ly" peace is what the "group grade," i.e., "National" testing, i.e., "force field analysis" is all about),

2). "unfreezing, moving, refreezing," i.e., through the use of dialogue —with you sharing your desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment with others, and them doing the same with you in a "non-judgmental," non-"preachy- teachy" environment, i.e., in an anti-patriarchal or facilitated (manipulated) environment (dialogue is based upon feelings, discussion is based upon commands, rules, facts, and truth, by adding feelings (your opinion) to a discussion you turn discussion into dialogue, negating commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., negating doing right and not wrong as an outcome, resulting in the outcome being based upon feelings, i.e., your (and others) carnal desires (opinions) of the 'moment' instead—the father's authority system is found in, and thus can be supported in a discussion but is not found in, and therefore can not be supported in a dialogue, i.e., by your participation in dialogue, you abdicate the father's/Father's authority system, negating your right to hold anyone accountable for doing "wrong,"

3). and "group dynamics"—created by your desire to relate with others who you like, are drawn to, or have something to gain in the relationship or because of it, engendering in you a willingness to compromise, i.e., to set aside or deny the father's/Father's standards because of your desire for their approval, with them "affirming" your (and their) desire for pleasure (for the things of the world) and dissatisfaction with restraint (with the father's/Father's authority system),

4). engendering a "consensus"—a "feeling" or "perception" of "oneness"—putting consensus, i.e., "the group's" common desire for pleasure and common dissatisfaction with restraint (which are "feelings"), i.e., common-ism into "group," social, or community action, with everyone working together as "a team" on a community project—praxis, in order to (as in "new" world order)

5). engendering globalism—a combination of capitalism and socialism where "self-interest" is not isolated from "the collective interests of 'the people'" or usurping it, as capitalism by itself does, but is instead united with "the collective interest of 'the people" (a perception), i.e., the "community of interest," i.e., that which is "of and for self and 'the people,'" called communitarianism, i.e., "public-private partnership," where private (that which is nobody's business) goes into partnership with public (that which is everybody's business), thus sacrificing private upon the alter of public interest without knowing it, doing so for the "common good" of "the people" (a perception). Are we really this stupid?—treating a facilitator of 'change' as a god and those who follow him as saints, entrusting our children, our spouse, our business, our land, and even our very own souls to them (as two "children" did in the garden in Eden). There is nothing new under the sun

That is the formula for 'change'—which I covered in one of my fourteen, three hour class periods (which included explaining J. L. Moreno's role-playing procedure and the effect it has on those who participate, as well as Kenneth Benne's "Human Relations in Curriculum Change," dealing with Group Task Rolls, Group Relationship and Maintenance Roles, and Individual Roles, which are correlated with the Patriarchal paradigm, which are negated through the role playing procedure). And by the way things are looking, it is working, i.e., having its way (for now that is). The only problem for those of dialectic 'reasoning' is the Father sending His Son the second time, to get his bride and judge them for their wicked thoughts and actions.
  Over the last twenty years I have been speaking (from coast to coast) on the subject of 'change,' i.e., on the dialectic process—which was my teacher training ("Bloom's Taxonomies," explained below). It appears I may be one of only a few who are interested in knowing the truth (about teacher training), with most, if interested, dealing with only the symptoms (poor grades, with standards being lowered in order to "keep" the grades "up," with the youth
disregarding, questioning, challenging, disrespecting, disobeying, defying, dishonoring, and/or attacking authority) or the labels (which are many and ever changing: Goals 2000, No-Child-Left-Behind, Common Core, etc., despite the fact that they all use the same underlying process) but not the source of the problem, i.e., the use of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "group psychotherapy," i.e., the consensus process in the classroom—where the focus of education is on socialist's-environmentalist's, i.e., globalist's concerns, the three E's, i.e., ethnicity, economics, and environment, 'liberating' students from learning to do right and not wrong according to commands, rules, facts, and truth established by their parents, their teacher, their boss, ,,, "the laws of nature and natures God." The same dialectic process or system of revolution is being used by the government, the military, the police, the medical profession, businesses, etc., to set policy, as well as by "youth groups," "cell groups," and board meetings in the "church," 'changing' the way everyone feelings, thinks, and acts, and relate with themselves, others, and the world, as well as perceive and respond to authority.
   I would hope that some educators, after reading the following, would repent, i.e., would turn from their use of the dialectic process
i.e., from their using the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, i.e., the "group grade" system in the classroom, as I did, and expose it for what it is, a process of deceit and wickedness, 'changing' students, i.e., 'liberating' them from having faith in their parents (and/or God), from respecting their (and His) authority, and from obeying them (and/or Him). Dialectic 'reasoning' is used to initiate and sustain 'change'—used to 'liberate' students (and teachers, parents, etc.,) from the father's/Father's authority system (from having faith in the father/Father, i.e., from doing right and not wrong according to his/His will, i.e., from thinking and acting according to his/His commands, rules, facts, and truth), negating the guilty conscience for doing wrong, i.e., for disobeying/for sinning in the process, so that the child can do wrong (disobey) with no sense of guile and man can sin with impunity.
The laws of nature and the law of the flesh are not one and the same, as those of dialectic 'reasoning' teach and praxis (put into social action)—treating their theories (opinions) as a fact or truth, while treating facts and truth as theories, as just another opinion. Immanuel Kant's "lawfulness without law" (Critique of Judgment) is just another way of say man is to live by the law of the flesh (according to his feelings of the 'moment'), 'liberated' from the law of God (doing right and not wrong according to the will of God, i.e., living by
"every word which proceedeth from the mouth of God"). The laws of nature were created (are established) by God, for all times and in all places. They are observable and consistent (repeatable). The law of the flesh is, on the other hand, not consistent. For example: the law of the flesh is the child's attraction toward an object in the environment (imagined or real) that stimulates pleasure, i.e., that stimulates his desire to relate with it, with him desiring to control the object of pleasure (or the environment it resides in) in order to continue or augment the pleasure it stimulates. It is also the child's resentment of or hatred toward an object in the environment (imagined or real) that stimulates pain, i.e., that stimulates his desire to avoid it, desiring to gain control over the object of pain (or the environment it resides in) in order to negate it (in order to have and control the object in the environment that stimulates pleasure). The law of the flesh is "observable and definable" but not consistent as the laws of nature which are subject to stimulus-response. The law of the flesh is influenced by the child's will to do right and not wrong, with the child having a guilty conscience when he does wrong, which inhibits or blocks 'change,' i.e., which restraints the law of the flesh. With God, man is either right or wrong, redeemed or lost, etc., an either-or paradigm (a paradigm is the way you feel, think, act, and relate with yourself, others, and the world around you, as well as with God), as reflected in the laws of nature. According to dialectic 'reasoning,' man is becoming better or worse over time (progressively), with his use of dialectic 'reasoning' to 'justify' the law of the flesh being better ("good sense") and his faith in God's Word and thus obeying God—with God, the Heavenly Father requiring him to repent of his carnal thoughts and actions, i.e., his praxis of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., his "self 'justification" and, being 'redeemed' by His Son, Jesus Christ, be 'reconciled' to Himself, humbling, denying, controlling, disciplining his "self," bringing his flesh (that which makes him subject to this world only) under submission to His will—being worse (evil), i.e., irrational, therefore irrelevant.
   Using dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., dialoguing with himself, his desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment,' the child is able to 'justify' his carnal desires, i.e., the law of the flesh, i.e., his wicked thoughts and actions of the 'moment,' deceiving himself into believing (in his own eyes, i.e., according to his own perception or opinion) that since the things which stimulate pleasure are "good, i.e., "feel good" to him in the flesh, in the 'moment,' he himself,
who by nature desires them (who "lusts" after them, i.e., who covets them), is "good" as well. The object of those possessed with (blinded by) dialectic 'reasoning' is to make the law of the flesh, which is common to all children (and men and women), the law of the land (the basis of common-ism AKA Communism), negating any law established by God, the creator, making man subject to his carnal flesh, i.e., his carnal desires, i.e., that which is of the world only (what is, interestingly, also an either-or condition, i.e., either work with us for the "common good," i.e., for the "good" of "the community" or be 'labeled' a resistor of 'change,' i.e., not a "team player").
   Disappointed, but knowing as much at the beginning of this research, I have found that truth is always censored,
in other words has to be 'labeled' as "extreme" and blocked from public access (as this website is labeled and blocked by MacAfee and many other companies such as Raytheon, Fed Ex, Kinko's, etc., and many Universities, including Christian) in a society of 'change,' i.e., in a society of opinions, i.e., in an "open minded" society, where a person's "feelings" of the 'moment'—which engenders the "super-ego"—and not some authority over or above him such as the child's parents or God—which engenders a guilty conscience for doing wrong—determines how he is to think and act, thus making him subject to seduction, deception, and manipulation instead, i.e., making him "human resource" to be used, as "natural resource," by facilitators of 'change' for their own gain, i.e., for their own pleasure, so that they can do wrong (sin) with impunity, i.e., with no sense of guilt for their wicked thoughts and actions. When you add "feelings," i.e., the affective domain, i.e., the deceitful and wicked heart of man to the conscience, i.e., to "right" and "wrong" it (the conscience) becomes a so called "super-ego" (is negated), making the person subject to 'change,' i.e., subject to the situation of the 'moment,' as well as subject to the person manipulating the situation (the environment), i.e., the facilitator of 'change', who by "helping" "the group" determine the "appropriate information" to be used in the so called "discussion," i.e., censoring "inappropriate information"—the preaching and teaching of the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth which engenderers a guilty conscience for doing wrong in the individuals in "the group"—which would inhibit or block the outcome, i.e.., the consensus process, i.e., the dialectic process of 'change' and the facilitator of 'change's' control over the people and their land, using them for his own pleasure, for his own gain. In the end that is what dialectic 'reasoning' is all about, 'liberating' the child/man from the father's/Father's authority system, negating the guilty conscience for doing wrong/for sinning in the process, so that the master facilitator of 'change' can rule the world unimpeded, i.e., rule over a "new" world order where all men's thoughts and actions ("theory and practice") are uninhibited, i.e., are one and the same, i.e., are subject to "nature" only. The scriptures warn us of such a "man" and of such a day, i.e., of such a times as these.
   When believers—those who not only share with others God's love for them but also inform them of their deceitful and wicked heart and warn them of God's judgment upon them (
damnation) for their carnal (unrighteous, i.e., deceitful and wicked) thoughts and actions, informing them of their need to 'repent' (therefore being "negative" to them according to the flesh), i.e., of God's judging them for their use of dialectic 'reasoning' to 'justify' themselves, thus setting aside (negating) the "negative" (having denied God's authority over them, in their feelings, thoughts, and actions, they have negated the consequences of their doing wrong, in their feelings, thoughts, and actions) in order to "feel better" about themselves and be less "offensive" to others (in order to feel "good," i.e., "positive," according to the flesh)—are silent in the midst of unrighteousness (not reproving, correcting, and rebuking those who praxis sin, i.e., those who desire to make sin, i.e., mans carnal nature, i.e., the law of the flesh, i.e., "human nature" the law of the land)—because of their desire for the approval of men—their silence gives consent to doing wrong, i.e., to sinning, resulting in unrighteousness and abomination (the removal of righteousness [and the righteous, i.e., those made righteous in Christ Jesus] from setting policy) becoming the "norm," i.e., the law of the land. The moment a minister does not address the iniquity of a leader, that leader's inequity become the law of the land. To be silent in the midst of unrighteousness—in order to initiate and/or sustain relationship with (peace with and affirmation from) men—makes unrighteousness (and abomination) the "norm," i.e., the law of the land, using "human nature," i.e., man's carnal nature, i.e., men's carnal desires and dissatisfactions to determine right from wrong with. It is why the dialectic process is called "the negation of negation," i.e., the removal of the fear of God, i.e., the negation of the father's/Father's authority system in the feelings, thoughts, and actions of men, including in their relationship with one another and the world. Remove the threat of chastening or judgment (damnation), i.e., the fear of God from the land and the law of the flesh (the heart of man, i.e., his love of pleasure and hate of restraint [and the restrainer]) will rule the day, making unrighteousness and abomination the law of the land. It is why we have arrived at where we are today, with "Christians," including "ministers" (especially "ministers") becoming "tolerant of ambiguity," i.e., setting aside the Word of God, exalting the opinions of men (treating the Word of God as thought it is just another opinion), embracing 'change' in order to "grow" the "church," 'changing' the message of salvation into "salivation"—for the pleasures ("feelings," i.e., "sense experiences") of the 'moment,' i.e., for the pleasures of this life ("peace") and the pleasure which comes from the approval of men ("affirmation," i.e., "self esteem"). (G. W. F. Hegel, in Carl Friedrich, The Philosophy of Hegel; in reference to Hegel's "peace" and "affirmation" and his negation of the word "wrong," replacing it with the word "badly")
   God's love is not the same as man's love (1 John 2:15). God's love (and peace) is tied to his nature, which is spiritual, i.e., doing right and not wrong (with doing right and not wrong, according to His, i.e., the Heavenly Father's will being peace), man's love (and peace) is tied to his nature, which is flesh, i.e., approaching pleasure and avoiding pain (with man's augmentation of pleasure, including the pleasure which comes from the approval of men and the attenuation or negation of pain, including the pain which comes from being rejected by others, being peace), resulting in man deceiving himself, believing since his flesh "feels so 'good'" when it get's its way (especially when he receives the approval, i.e., the affirmation of men), he is righteous in and of himself, making himself righteous , i.e., "good" in his own eyes, turning God's love, with its restraints upon his nature, i.e., upon his flesh, into evil and his love, with its desires ("lusts" for pleasure, including the approval, i.e., affirmation of men) and dissatisfactions (hate of restraint, including the restrainer) into good. If you love the world you have to hate (destroy, i.e., kill, i.e., negate) the father/Father (and his/His system of authority) no matter how many times you say "I care" while doing it. Your "caring" just covers up (in your mind, i.e., in your perception) the wickedness of the deed (praxis). A "healthy" world (read "Health Care Package"), according to dialectic 'reasoning,' is a world 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority system, i.e., 'liberated from doing right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's will, so that man can be "of and for" himself, i.e., of the world (nature) only.
    Man's "peace," which is "of and for" this world, rejects God's peace, which is not "of this world." Christ Jesus has called no man to kill another man for His Kingdom, His Kingdom is not of this world. He has only called us to repent of our sins, i.e., to turn from our carnal desires and dissatisfactions, and follow after Him, preaching and teaching the Word of God that all men might repent of their carnal ways and come to know Him and His Heavenly Father's love for them. Any acts of violence by the "church" has been by the deeds (the carnal desires and dissatisfactions) of men, even when done in the name of the Lord. Man is only to defend himself, his family, his property, and his business from the thief, with government serving and protecting his right to do so. God, and He alone, will judge every man according to his deeds, ushering in His Kingdom by His own authority and power, that no man may boast, i.e., take pride in himself, i.e., glory in the flesh and in the praises of men. Religions of violence (using force, i.e., death or the threat of death by roaming "groups," i.e., gangs all the way up to the power of government to initiate and sustain its religion—from tribalism, to nationalism, to globalism) reveals man's heart, i.e., his 'loyalty' to this world, basing "good" upon his carnal desires ("lusts") and dissatisfactions (hate). Only those who accept that God (and God alone) will judge man (whether he will receive life or death for his thoughts and actions—the first death being in place already, because of man's sins, the second yet to come, for those who refused to repent, i.e., who refused to 1. turn from their carnal desires, i.e., their love of pleasure and hate of restraint [and the restrainer], 2. who, loving the pleasure which comes from the approval or affirmation of men, are unable to endure the rejection of man, and therefore 3. loving the pleasures of this life, i.e., including the approval of men, i.e., making "heaven" subject to (in common with) their fleshly desires, refuse to follow after the Lord Jesus Christ, i.e., doing His Heavenly Father's will), will seek for 'limited' government in this world, where government is civil, so that they can preach and teach faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, i.e., God's love, in peace (called freedom of the conscience, religion or belief, and speech—whereas dialectic 'reasoning' is freedom from the conscience, religion, and speech, replacing the preaching and teaching of truth with the dialoguing of men's opinions, treating belief as an opinion and truth as a theory, making them ever subject to 'change,' i.e., ever subject to man's carnal desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment').
    Having spoken in liberal universities, with liberal professors at the end of my presentation stating they could not refute a word I said (having read their "hero's" books, I quoted them, [as I quote one of them below] exposing their hatred toward God, i.e., their hatred toward the Lord Jesus Christ and those of faith in Him), that they simply did not like me for what I said (exposing their agenda—needless to say, I am not invited back), I know what I am saying is true. Although I do not need their "confirmation"—truth stands on its own—it in some way helps. It is "ministers" who are most deceitful and dishonest (and rude), doing what I call "damage control" after my speaking, in order to neutralize what I shared with "their" congregation—'justifying' their use of the dialectic process (the compromising of God's Word) in order to "grow" the "church," "building relationship upon 'self' interest," labeling those who use the Word of God to expose them, i.e., their use of dialectic 'reasoning, i.e., the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, i.e., "self 'justification'" to "grow" the "church," as being divisive, i.e., the source of dissention and division within the "church."
   As the "church" goes the nation goes. Satan, instead of fighting against the "church," has joined it instead, becoming an administrator, i.e., a facilitator 'change,' "helping" it "grow" by making the Word of God subject to the opinions of men, i.e., subject to what people "think," based upon their "feelings" (desires) of the 'moment,' thereby establishing the "church" upon, i.e., making its foundation the praxis of men dialoguing their opinions to a consensus, thus making the facilitator of 'change' its cornerstone, making it, i.e., the "word of God" and the "church," readily adaptable to 'change,' i.e., subject to man's "felt needs" (carnal desires and dissatisfactions) of the 'moment,' i.e., 'driven' by man's desire ("lust") for pleasure, including the pleasure which comes from the approval of men (affirmation, i.e., "the pride of life"), 'purposed' in augmenting pleasure (peace and affirmation according to the laws of the flesh) for all mankind. It is why it is so difficult to communicate with those infected with dialectic 'reasoning,' the only response you get from them, if not indifference, argumentation, accusation, and/or hostility, being that "deer in the headlight" look. If you are not into the Word, not just studying it but applying it to your mind and heart daily as well, meditating upon on it day and night, allowing the Holy Spirit to guide you in not only what to share (preach and teach) but when to share (preach and teach) it, all you have in response to the dialectic process is your feelings and thoughts (your opinion) of the 'moment,' 'justifying' the process.
   Believers, who were once key to the fabric (culture) of this nation, have now—with the "help" of "ministers," i.e., facilitators of 'change'—become labeled "extremists" (because they continue to hold fast to the Word of God without compromise—what was the heart and soul of the Protestant Reformation, i.e., doing their best [individually] as unto the Lord, accepting the "priesthood of all believers," putting no man between them and God, understanding that salvation is by grace and not by works [with works following after faith], that righteousness is imputed through faith in Christ Jesus alone, and preaching and teaching that on the day of judgment the Lord God will hold everyone accountable, according to the thoughts which they are entertaining and the actions which they are doing today, etc.,). As Max Horkheimer (a Marxist) noted in his book, Vernunft and Selbsterhaltung (Reasoning and the Preservation [salvation] of Self): "Protestantism was the strongest force in the extension of cold rational individualism."—something which had to be negated if globalism ("We working for Us") was to become a 'reality.' In his book, Eclipse of Reason, Horkheimer wrote: "For the men who made the Constitution there was no principle that did not derive its authority from a religious source [from an authority above human nature]." "Government and its trust [quoting John Dickenson] is 'found on the nature of man, that is, on the will of his Maker and . . . [is] therefore sacred. It is an offence against Heaven to violate that trust.'" Changing duality (above-below) into plurality (diversity of religions, i.e., diversity of men's opinions—treating belief as a theory, therefore God's Word as an opinion amongst opinions, which makes the uncompromising, i.e., "entrenched" believer, i.e., "fundamentalist" appear as being irrational, i.e., "hateful"), secularism has progressively negated the affect of the Word of God on the affairs of men. Karl Marx wrote: "It is not individualism [under God] that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society ["the group" in consensus, i.e., setting aside their differences, i.e., their beliefs, i.e., their faith, , i.e., "judgmentalism" ("prejudices") so that they can working together as "one" for the "common good"] is the necessary framework through which freedom [from the father's/Father's authority system] and individuality [freedom to do as one pleases] are made realities." (Karl Marx, quoted in John Lewis, The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx) If the authority of God's word were accepted by men, then we would not be where we are today, subject to laws protecting, supporting, and promoting the unrighteousness and abominations of men. As the Marxist Jürgen Habermas in his book Theory and Practice admitted: "If the 'restoring of life' of the world is to be conceived in terms of the Christian revelation, then Marx must collapse into a bottomless abyss." I do not blame the secular world for what has happened to this nation, the last six commandments of the Ten Commandments are secular in structure, dealing with man's relationship with man. I blame "Christians," who, abdicating the faith, have chosen the approval of men, i.e., the opinions of men over and therefore against the approval, i.e., the Word of God.
   The dialectic process (the consensus process) is simply the method used by the first (and master) facilitator of 'change,' "helped" two "children" become "themselves," i.e., "of and for self" and the world only, in the garden in Eden, i.e., Genesis 3:1-6—using the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus (the formula for 'change') to 'discover' "truth" —"Reasoning" (aufheben) from their "feelings" (desires, "lusts," impulses and urges) of the 'moment,' in the "light" of (stimulated and "illuminated" by) the current situation and the desires it stimulated (with the facilitator of 'change' manipulating the situation by creating a "safe zone," i.e., a "positive" environment for dialogue, i.e. "you will not die"), thus 'justifying' their desires, i.e., pleasures, i.e., "Self" (sight) over and therefore against the "Father's" commands, rules, facts, or truth (faith), putting their desires (love of pleasure and hate of restraint) into action (praxis), negating the "Father's" authority system, i.e., Hebrews 12:5-11—no longer doing right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's will, i.e.., no longer thinking and acting according to the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, or truth—and the guilty conscience for doing wrong, i.e., Romans 7:14-25—disregarding (considering as irrational and therefore irrelevant) their need to ask for forgiveness from the father/Father, repent, and turn from their wicked ways—in the "children's" feelings, thoughts, and actions, and in their relationship with one another and the world, so that they could sin with impunity, i.e., do what they want to do, when they want to do it, with others in consent, without considering the consequence, i.e., without having a sense of judgment or damnation (in their perception), 'justifying' themselves, i.e., their feelings, thoughts, and actions by blaming someone else, i.e., their parents, siblings, spouse, neighbors, society, (with Adam blaming the woman, and the woman blaming the serpent, i.e., the woman being the first environmentalists, i.e., "tree hugger," choosing the pleasure of the tree over God and Adam being the first humanist, choosing the woman, i.e., "human relationship" over God, with both being the first socialists, blaming someone else for their problems), etc., or blaming something else, i.e., the environment, living conditions, lack of support, sleep, food, money, education, etc. for their problems.
    It is the same method (consensus process, i.e., the dialoguing of opinions, i.e., desires and dissatisfactions, i.e., love of pleasure and hate of restraint to a "feeling" of "oneness" with "Self," others, and the world, affirming the child's carnal nature, i.e., what he or she has in common with all that is of the world only—as he or she was before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into his or her life—engendering socialism-globalism, i.e., common-ism) being used today in our classrooms, town hall meetings, board meetings, socialist gatherings, etc., even in the "church," in the name of "change," , i.e., "Making the world safe for Democracy," i.e., "Building relationship upon Self interest," etc.,. engendering a culture of unrighteousness and abomination, with everyone living in (and for) the 'moment,' thinking and acting according to ("of and for") the flesh, i.e., according to "the law of sin," i.e., according to "human nature"as in the days of Noah.

    It is a subtle and complex process with one agenda, replacing the preaching and teaching of commands, rules, facts, and truth to be accepted as is (by faith) and obeyed (with threat of chastening for disobedience or being cast out for disrespecting authority—with God, who is perfect and demands perfection, judgment and damnation for sinning, requiring 'reconciliation' via. atonement and 'repentance' i.e., faith in His Son, with obedience to His will following—which engenders a guilty conscience for doing wrong, i.e., for sinning) with the dialoguing of opinions (what you are think about in the 'moment,' stimulated by your "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., in the "light" of the current situation, manipulated by the facilitator of 'change') to a consensus (to a feeling of "oneness" with others, making 'truth' subject to man's carnal interpretations of the 'moment' only), negating the father's/Father's authority system, i.e., a method or a away of thinking and acting where truth is objective, i.e., external to man's carnal feelings ("lusts") of the 'moment,' not subjective, i.e., taken captive to his carnal desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment'—negating the guilty conscience for doing wrong, i.e., for disobedience in the process. It is a process we all do internally (naturally, i.e., carnally), talking to ourselves, i.e., dialoguing with ourselves about our carnal desires of the 'moment' (for pleasure) and our dissatisfaction with restraint, i.e., resenting (hating) the restrainer. When voiced externally it engenders anarchy. When shared through dialogue with others, who are in agreement—in consensus or affirmation—and put into social action—into praxis—it engenders revolution, i.e., 'change.' When brought under submission, i.e., when we are chastened, thereby humbling, denying, controlling, and disciplining our "self," under the parent's/God's authority, a "peaceful fruit of righteousness" (maturity, i.e., knowing right from wrong, doing right, reproving, correcting, rebuking wrong) is produced, something the facilitator of change' hates, not being able to gain control over us, i.e., not being able to seduce, deceive, and manipulate us for his own gain (pleasure).
    With dialectic 'reasoning,' life is a progression (a process of "changingness") from "authoritarianism," i.e., the father's/Father's authority system to 'liberty,' i.e., to where the child's carnal nature is 'liberated from the affects of the father's/Father's authority system, determining a persons worth based upon where along the spectrum or continuum of 'changingness' they reside at any given 'moment,' in any given situation—making "truth" subject to the 'changing' situations of the 'moment'—rejecting truth based upon "morality and competence," i.e., upon doing right and not wrong according to the Father's will—where truth is established for all times and in all places. All "certified" teachers and "accredited" schools are established upon what are called "Bloom's Taxonomies," which state: "We recognize the point of view that truth and knowledge are only relative and that there are no hard and fast truths which exist for all time and places." (Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. The Classification of Educational Goals. Book 1: Cognitive Domain, p. 32)
    This is the classroom procedure (curriculum) which (from the 50's on) 'changed' America, negating (in the feelings, thoughts, and actions of the children) respect for parent's/God's authority. "There are many stories of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook 2: Affective Domain, p. 83) The correlation (generalization) between the parent's (the earthly father's) authority (with the children obeying) and God's' (the Heavenly Father's) authority (with the Son and those following after Him obeying) is key to understanding the dialectic process, i.e., is at the heart of dialectic 'reasoning.'
    One of Bloom's sources, Theodor Adorno, wrote: "Authoritarian submission was conceived of as a very general attitude that would be evoked in relation to a variety of authority figures—parents, older people, leaders, supernatural power, and so forth." "God is conceived more directly after a parental image and thus as a source of support and as a guiding and sometimes punishing authority." "The power—relationship between the parents, the domination of the subject's family by the father or by the mother, and their relative dominance in specific areas of life also seemed of importance for our problem." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) "Bloom's Taxonomies" are based upon the works of Marxists' (Transformational Marxists', those who merge Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud in the praxis of "group psychotherapy") such as Theodor Adorno.
    You and your children may be Marxists and not even know it. If you are concerned about your own children's or someone else's children's social life rather than their doing right and not wrong, then who needs Karl Marx around, when you will do.
    While dad and mom are not perfect, they may be down right tyrants, the office they serve in, under God, is. Dialectic 'reasoning' has only one 'purpose,' the negation of that office. As Abraham Maslow, the "father" of "the hierarchy of 'felt' needs,'" wrote, revealing his attitude and behavior toward college students who held to their parents and/or God's position, maintaining a "right-wrong" attitude regarding personal-social issues, "I have found whenever I ran across authoritarian students that the best thing for me to do was to break their backs immediately." "The correct thing to do with authoritarians is to take them realistically for the bastards they are and then behave toward them as if they were bastards." (Abraham Maslow, Maslow on Management) This is the spirit behind dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., the 'drive' and the 'purpose' of facilitators of 'change,' who might appear (at first) to be the nicest people on the face of the earth, dedicated to "helping" you satisfy your "felt needs," i.e., "helping" you 'actualize' your "self interests" until you cross them, i.e., get in their way, telling them that what they are doing is wrong, engendering a guilty conscience in them, at least in those following them, inhibiting or blocking 'change.'

The following is broken up into 36 parts in the Issues link above (July, 2016), for easier reading.

"Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein. Also I set watchmen over you, saying, Hearken to the sound of the trumpet. But they said, We will not hearken." Jeremiah 6:16, 17

"And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them. And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour: the child shall behave himself proudly against the ancient, and the base against the honourable." "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:4-5, 12

   By speaking to your children, encouraging them to pursue their heart's desire of the 'moment,' "building relationship" with one another (along with the other children of the world) upon their common "self interests" (Genesis 3:1-6)—transcending their culture, their boarders, and their traditions, i.e., your culture, your boarders, and your traditions, i.e., your authority and God's authority which you have accepted, i.e., that you have placed your hope and faith in over you—the facilitator of 'change' comes between your children and you, "helping" your children 'liberate' themselves from your authority, negating your authority and God's authority over them (Hebrews 12:5-11) and the guilty conscience for doing wrong (Romans 7:14-25)—for disobedience, for "lusting" after the pleasures of the 'moment,' for making pleasure the 'drive' of life and the augmentation of pleasure the 'purpose' of life, for taking the life (or being indifferent to anyone else taking the life) of the innocent, i.e., the unborn, the elderly, and anyone else who gets in the way, i.e., in the "path" of progress, i.e., 'change,' i.e., pleasure—in your children's feelings, thoughts, and actions, and in their relationship with one another (along with their relationship with the other children of world). By coming into your children's life, encouraging them to dialogue their "self interest," revealing to one another what they have been secretly "coveting" but were afraid to share for fear of being reprimanded, i.e., reproved, corrected, rebuked, chastened, or cast out (rejected), by offering to help them turn their "self interest," i.e., their imagination into reality, the facilitator of 'change' is able to seduce your children into listening to and following after them—taking your (and God's) place. With your children believing that the facilitator of 'change' has their "best interest," i.e., their "self interest" of the 'moment' in mind—when in truth it is their own "self interest" that they have in mind—your children are easily deceive. Then through the use of "feigned" words, i.e., "plastic words," i.e., i.e., nebulous words, i.e., generalized (ambiguous) words (and phrases), i.e., words (and phrases) which can be easily interpreted (perceived) to mean one thing when in truth they mean another (to the facilitator of 'change'), the facilitator of 'change' is able to manipulate your children into doing his will, making "merchandise" ("human resource") out of them, using them and their inheritance, i.e., your money, property, and business—which are heavily taxed—for their own gain and pleasure, turning your children against you, your authority, and any authority you have accepted, i.e., that you have placed your hope and faith in, over you, no longer having a guilty conscience for doing wrong, knowing (deep down) what they are doing is wrong but doing what they want to do, i.e., what "feelings" good or right to them in the 'moment,' anyway. "There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 16:25, 26 "And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you ;" 2 Peter 2:22
    When the schools removed the preaching of commands and rules to be obeyed and the teaching of facts and truth to be accepted as is, by faith, i.e., the father's/Father's authority system, i.e., "the old paths" in the classroom, replacing it with the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, i.e., with the children's "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., with their "affective domain"—their desires and dissatisfactions, i.e., their desire for pleasure, including the pleasure which comes with "group approval" or affirmation and their dissatisfaction with or resentment toward being restrained, associated with pain, including not only the pain of missing out on the pleasures of the 'moment' but also the pain of being rejected—they not only 'changed' the children, they 'changed' the parents, i.e., the family, the neighborhood, township, village, town, city, county, state, and the nation, including the church, 'liberating' them from parental/Godly restraint, 'creating' a so called "new" world order, i.e., a culture of unrighteousness and abomination, resulting in facilitators of 'change,' i.e., psychotherapists ("group psychotherapists"), i.e., Transformational Marxists (who, by merging Marx and Freud, created "group psychotherapy," i.e., the consensus process) controlling the outcome of any meeting, i.e., how policy is made and problems (crisis) are solved, affecting how people feel, think, and act toward traditional authority, i.e., rejecting the father's/Father's authority system, from the home to the highest offices in the land, including the church. Change the classroom curriculum (the students learning environment) from the teacher inculcating facts and truth, i.e., with the teacher preaching commands and rules to be obeyed and teaching facts and truth to be accepted as is, by faith, which engenders individualism and nationalism (sovereignty), i.e., freedom of the conscience, where the duty of life is to do "right and not wrong," under God, to where "facilitators of 'change'" "encourage" students to dialogue their opinions with one another—to openly share with one another what they are thinking at that 'moment' (which is being influenced by their feelings at that 'moment,' which are being influenced by the situation at that 'moment,' which is being manipulated by the facilitator of 'change')—in order to arrive at a consensus, i.e., at a "feeling" of "oneness," which engenders socialism and globalism (equality), i.e., freedom from the conscience, where the 'drive' (and 'purpose') of life is the approaching (and augmenting) of pleasure and the avoiding (and attenuating) of pain ("displacing" the conscience, i.e., the voice of the father in the child, i.e., "doing right and not wrong" according to the father's/Father's will, with the so called "super-ego" which is subject to the child's feelings and the situation of the 'moment'), and you 'change' the world, making it subject to "human nature" only, negating the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system, i.e., the guilty conscience for doing wrong, i.e., for disobedience in the children, in their feelings, thoughts, and actions, and in their relationship with one another and the world. The method guarantees, i.e., initiates and sustains the outcome.
    In other words, The answers are in the questions, i.e., in how the questions are framed. If someone asks you how you feel or what you think, your response will be an opinion, i.e., a relativistic or situational, i.e., dialectic answer, not an absolute, unchanging fact or truth, i.e., "right" or "wrong," i.e., didactic answer. But if they ask you what you know, your response will be a position, i.e., an unchanging fact or truth, i.e., "right" or "wrong" ("This is right and that is wrong"), i.e., didactic answer, which is an absolute answer, not an "I feel" or "I think," i.e., relativistic or situational, i.e., dialectic, i.e., opinion answer, where, when things go wrong (or rather, in dialectic Reasoning, gone "badly") the person simply did not having the appropriate information, making it somebody else fault and/or they did not think, i.e., Reason it through properly, i.e., did not use dialectic 'reasoning.' Change the method (of communication) and you change the outcome, whether the parents are in control (under God)—rule of lawpreaching commands and rules to be obeyed and teaching facts and truth to be accepted as is, by faith, with the parent's, at their discretion, discussing things with their children in order to make sure that they (their children) understand their commands, rules, facts, or truth, with children having a guilty conscience for doing wrong, or the children are in control (under the influence, i.e., seduction, deception, and manipulation of facilitators of 'change'), thinking and acting according to their carnal nature—rule of man—with the children determining right from wrong, i.e., 'justifying' themselves based upon their feelings (desires, "lusts," or "self interests") of the 'moment,' i.e., their opinion of the 'moment, with the situation of the 'moment,' the information of the 'moment,' and the facilitator of 'change' (who is influencing it) 'creating' a "new" world order out of their own imagination—with no moral absolutes, i.e., having no guilty conscience for doing wrong—just don't get caught and if you are, blame somebody or something else, i.e., the environment or situation, lack of support, funds, education, etc.,).
   You have to know, i.e., clearly understand what it is you want to 'change,' i.e., what it is you want to destroy or negate, if you are to successfully initiate and sustain 'change,' i.e., its negation. Dr. Robert Trojanowicz, the facilitator of 'change' for COPS (Community Oriented Policing System) wrote (defining what had to be negated if a police state, i.e., globalism was to become a reality): "Social control is most effective at the individual level. The personal conscience is the key element in ensuring self-control, refraining from deviant behavior even when it can be easily perpetrated. The family, the next most important unit affecting social control, is obviously instrumental in the initial formation of the conscience and in the continued reinforcement of the values that encourage law abiding behavior. Unfortunately, because of the reduction of influence exerted by neighbors, the extended family and even the family, social control is now often more dependent on external control, than on internal self-control." (Dr. Robert Trojanowicz, Community Policing: The meaning of "Community" in Community Policing) This by the man who advocated using crime to gain access to (and control over) the community, engendering a police state ("external control") over the people. "The community of interest generated by crime, disorder and fear of crime becomes the goal to allow community policing officers [international law and global enforcement] an entry into the geographic community [with regionalism superseding local, township, city, county, state, national control]." (ibid.) By taking a policeman or sheriff outside his county to work together as a "team" with other policemen or sheriffs in other counties, or bringing one(s) from outside his county to work together with him as a "team" in his county, his (and their) conscience, i.e., loyalty to doing right and not wrong according to the culture, traditions, or customs of his (their) county (or family) is negated, transformed him (them) into 'loyalty' to regional or global (socialist) interests. It is why the French directorate, during the French revolution, restructured (regionalized) all the parishes, in order to destroy the loyalty of the local sheriff to his parish, which would prevent 'change.' The same applies to all professions of life.
    Dialectic 'reasoning' makes itself known by blaming the crimes (crisis) of the day upon social, economic, and environmental conditions without recognizing the heart of man, i.e., man's need to repent, i.e., the father's/Father's authority system. If you have a guilty conscience for doing wrong, which originates from the traditional family, then you do not need a "police state," i.e., "sight based management," i.e., somebody watching over you at all times, i.e., cameras on every street corner and in every store in order to stop you from committing a crime. You will not commit a crime because committing a crime (or being deviant) is wrong, i.e., your conscience will bother you.
    "And truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." 1 John 3:1 Those taken captive to dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., those dialoguing their opinions to a consensus, i.e., those asking you how you "feel" and what you "think" (in the 'moment'), making feelings, i.e., opinion, i.e., "self interest," i.e., "imagination" (and the social, economic, and environmental conditions that inhibit or block them, i.e., the father's/Father's authority system, i.e., "the old paths" or gives promise or hope of satisfying them , i.e., "We working for Us," i.e., the "new" world order with the facilitator of 'change' in control) the foundation upon which to "build relationship," are intolerant of and closed minded toward the father's/Father's authority system, i.e., are hateful toward those of faith, i.e., toward true believers (in denial, claiming they are not being hateful but only "caring"). Instead of diligently seeking the Lord, i.e., fellowshipping "with the Heavenly Father, and his Son Jesus Christ" they diligently seek ways to silence or remove those who "fellowship with the Heavenly Father, and his Son Jesus Christ," i.e., true believers from "affecting" their lives and the lives of others (engendering a guilty conscience in them for doing wrong or for sinning), not only in the world but in the "church" as well.
    "If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him." "For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh [where our feelings are taken captive to the situation of the 'moment'], and the lust of the eyes [where our thoughts of the 'moment', i.e., our imagination is taken captive to our feelings of the 'moment'], and the pride of life ["Self" 'justification'—where we, evaluating ourselves, others, and the world around us according to our carnal desires (our hearts desire), perceiving ourselves as being right, i.e., "righteous," i.e., "good" in their own eyes (as god), with the affirmation of others 'justifying' our carnal feelings, thoughts, and actions of the 'moment' engendering "Self esteem," i.e., "Self" worship], is not of the Father, but is of the world." 1 John 2:15b, 16 Bracketed information added. "Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God." Luke 16:15 "Every one that is proud in heart is an abomination to the LORD: though hand join in hand, he shall not be unpunished." Proverbs 16:5
   Believers, i.e., those who have "the love of the Father" in them, who daily, denying themselves (humbling themselves "under the mighty hand of God," that he might exalt them "in due time." 1 Peter 5:6), picking up their cross (enduring the rejection of men), follow after Christ Jesus, doing His Heavenly Father's will—"casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;" 2 Corinthians 10:5 You can not have faith in God (keep your faith) and dialogue your opinion to a consensus, i.e., become at-one-with the world in thought and deed, i.e., in theory and practice, i.e., in social action, i.e., in praxis. "But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." Hebrews 11:6 "Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." James 4:4
    Carl Rogers explained it (the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus) this way: "If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, the predicted behaviors will follow." [By removing the father's/Father's authority system from the room (by insisting upon open dialogue), the child's carnal nature will become manifest, with him and the group affirming it, making it the standard by which to live by. The dialoguing of opinions to a consensus is even being used by the "church" to "grow" itself, i.e., to grow its membership (its numbers), doing so through the use of "youth groups," "cell groups," etc.,. While the minister might be preaching a "good sermon" from the pulpit (in some cases to silence any opposition) it is through the process being used in the church, i.e., in its meetings, classes, sessions, or fellowship (assisted by the use of polls, surveys, and feasibility studies) that 'change' takes place in the "church."] "We know how to change the opinions of an individual in a selected direction, without his ever becoming aware of the stimuli which changed his opinion." "We know how to influence the ... behavior of individuals by setting up conditions which provide satisfaction for needs of which they are unconscious, but which we have been able to determine." "We can choose to use our growing knowledge to enslave people in ways never dreamed of before, depersonalizing them, controlling them by means so carefully selected that they will perhaps never be aware of their loss of personhood." "'Now that we know how positive reinforcement works [dialogue opinions to a consensus, i.e., affirmation], and why negative doesn't' [chastening for doing wrong or the threat of judgment and damnation for sinning]... 'we can be more deliberate and hence more successful in our cultural design." "We can achieve a sort of control under which the controlled, though they are following a code much more scrupulously than was ever the case under the old system, nevertheless feel free. They are doing what they want to do, not what they are forced to do. That's the source of the tremendous power of positive reinforcement―there's no restrain and no revolt. By a careful design, we control not the final behavior, but the inclination to behavior―the motives, the desires, the wishes ["self interest"]. The curious thing is that in that case the question of freedom never arises." "Prior to therapy the person is prone to ask himself, 'What would my parents want me to do?' During the process of therapy the individual come to ask himself, 'What does it mean to me?'" (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)
    "Kurt Lewin emphasized that the child takes on the characteristic behavior of the group in which he is placed. . . . he reflects the behavior patterns which are set by the adult leader of the group." (Wilbur Brookover, A Sociology of Education) "The group to which an individual belongs is the ground for his perceptions, his feelings, and his actions" (Kurt Lewin, Resolving social conflicts: Selected papers on group dynamics) "The individual accepts the new system of values and beliefs by accepting belongingness to the group." "The re-educative process has to fulfill a task which is essentially equivalent to a change in culture." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Benne, Human Relations on Curriculum Change) "Any real change of the culture of a group is, therefore, interwoven with the changes of the power constellation within the group." (Barker, Dembo, & Lewin, "frustration and regression: an experiment with young children" in Child Behavior and Development) "The power‑relationship between the parents, the domination of the subject's family by the father or by the mother, and their relative dominance in specific areas of life also seemed of importance for our problem ['liberating' the children from the father's/Father's authority system so that they can of themselves only, i.e., only of the world]." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) "What better way to help the patient [the child/the student] recapture the past than to allow him to re-experience and reenact ancient feelings toward parents in his current relationship to the therapist [to the facilitator]? The therapist [the facilitator] is the living personification of all parental images [taking the place of the parent, with your children becoming theirs]. Group therapists [facilitators] refuse to fill the traditional authority role: they do not lead in the ordinary manner, they do not provide answers and solutions, they urge the group [the children/the students] to explore and to employ its own resources [their carnal desires of the 'moment' and their dissatisfaction with parental restraint]. The group [the children/the students] [must] feel free to confront the therapist [the facilitator], who must not only permit, but encourage, such confrontation. He [the child/the student] reenacts early family scripts in the group and, if therapy is successful, is able to experiment with new behavior, to break free from the locked family role he once occupied. … the patient [the child/the student] changes the past by reconstituting it." (Irvin Yalom, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy)
    All certified teachers and accredited schools (from pre-school to post-graduate, as well as in all other professions, including private schools, Christian included) use "Bloom's Taxonomies" as their curriculum—how they educate their students. Bloom wrote "To create effectively a new set of attitudes and values [a new world order], the individual must undergo great reorganization of his personal beliefs and attitudes and he must be involved in an environment which in many ways is separated from the previous environment in which he was developed." "...many of these changes are produced by association with peers who have less authoritarian points of view [are deviants], as well as through the impact of a great many courses of study in which the authoritarian pattern [parental authority, i.e., the father's/Father's authority system] is in some ways brought into question while more rational and nonauthoritarian [socialist*] behaviors are emphasized." "There are many stories of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals: Handbook 2, Affective Domain) The two Marxists Bloom references as his world view, i.e., Theodor Adorno and Erick Fromm) wrote: "The family thus may be considered to be the psychological agent of the society." (Erick Fromm, Escape from Freedom) Therefore, according to Adorno, all government departments and agencies and social and religious institutions must use "social-environmental forces to change the parent's behavior toward the child," if 'change' is to become a reality. (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)
    *I do not use the word "democratic" in that "democracy" has become Marxist in structure from the 50's on:
"In fact, it is probably fair to say that Erich Fromm's Marx's Concept of Man introduced the young Marx to America and provided the dominant interpretation of this thinker for the students of the New Left." "…Fromm gave the humanitarian, idealist, and romantic proponents of the New Left a Marx they could love." (Stephen Eric Bronner, Of Critical Theory and its Theorists) "By The Authoritarian Personality 'revolutionary' had changed to the 'democratic.'" (Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research, 1923-1950) Both Erick Fromm's work (Escape from Freedom) and Theodore Adorno's work (The Authoritarian Personality) were foundation to the development of "Bloom's Taxonomies." "Changing a group atmosphere from autocracy toward democracy through a democratic leadership means that the autocratic followers must shift toward a genuine acceptance of the role of democratic followers." "It is of utmost importance that the trainer of democratic leaders establish and hold his position of leadership." "In a democratic process deviation is welcomed as a possible source of improvement in common ways of thinking and acting." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)
    Martin Luther warned us: "I greatly fear that the universities, unless they teach the Holy Scriptures diligently and impress them on the young students, are wide gates to hell. I would advise no one to send his child where the Holy Scriptures are not supreme. Every institution that does not unceasingly pursue the study of God's word becomes corrupt." (Luther's Works: Vol. 1, The Christian in Society: p. 207) "The sophists [those using dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., facilitators of 'change,' making 'reasoning' subject to "human feelings," i.e., to the affective domain in order to know 'truth'], nevertheless, rise proudly up, hold their ears, close their eyes, and turn away their heart just so that they may fill all ears with their human words, and alone may occupy the stage so that no one will bark against their assertion[s] ... The word of man is sacred and to be venerated, but God's word is handed over to whores ... the meaning of sin ... is dependent on the arbitrary choice of the sophists." "The sophists have imposed tyranny and bondage upon our freedom to such a point that we must not resist that twice accursed Aristotle [who taught that man's heart, i.e., his passion or affective domain is neither good nor evil in itself, only needing proper upbringing or training—understanding or education—to become good], but are compelled to submit. Shall we therefore be perpetually enslaved and never breath in Christian liberty, nor sigh from out of this Babylon for our scriptures and our home?" "Miserable Christians, whose words and faith still depend on the interpretations of men and who expect clarification from them! This is frivolous and ungodly. The Scriptures are common to all, and are clear enough in respect to what is necessary for salvation and are also obscure enough for inquiring minds ... let us reject the word of man." (Luther's Works: Vol. 32, Career of the Reformer: II, pp. 216, .217)

    From the home to the top positions in our nation, children (including your elected representatives—in thought and in action, i.e., in "theory and practice," i.e., putting their opinion of how the world "ought" to be into social-political action) have become obstinate and defiant to parental authority (to their constituents—who sent them to represent them, as a father sends his children to the store to buy his goods, abiding by his rules and commands, i.e., spending his money according to his shopping list, which limits their, i.e., the children's, i.e., the representative's, judge's, and president's powers—with our government, unique amongst all the nations of the world, limiting, i.e., dividing the branches of government, i.e., the power of government down to, but not including the family, with the parents, i.e., the father of the family having the greatest amount of power, i.e., having authority over his family, property, and business as a king, at least that is the way it was). Today, children/representatives, in consensus with one another, i.e., disregarding their parent's/their constituent's authority over them, i.e., setting aside doing right and not wrong according to their parent's/constituent's will, i.e., serving and protecting their own "self interests," i.e., their own "felt needs" of the 'moment,' i.e., "lusting" after the pleasure of the 'moment,' i.e., unwilling to suffer the pain of missing out on the pleasures of the 'moment' and endure the pain of being rejected by others for doing right and not doing wrong according to their parents/constituents will, engender a culture of unrighteousness and abomination/a government of anarchy, tyranny, and despotism, having no fear of judgment for their carnal/ungodly/wicked thoughts and carnal/ungodly/wicked deeds.
    You will not be able to read through the following unless you are upset, i.e., upset with someone coming between you and your children, turning them against you—with them disregarding, questioning, challenging, disrespecting, disobeying, defying, dishonoring, and/or attacking your authority as a parent. It explains how and why children are being deliberately/methodically 'liberated' from parental authority, i.e., 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority system—a system of specifics, i.e., a "top-down" system based upon the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth and the children's faith (in the father's/Father's facts and truth) and obedience (to the father's/Father's commands and rules), engendering a guilty conscience in the children for doing wrong, inhibiting or blocking 'change.' "Children of disobedience" now have government approval and support, with government departments, agencies, institutions (including the "church") initiating and sustaining the process of 'change,' encouraging children to question, challenge, disregard, and/or defy their parent's, i.e., the father's/Father's authority system, 'liberating' the children from having a guilty conscience for doing wrong, resulting in the children living in the 'moment,' i.e., thinking and acting according to their natural (carnal) desires of the 'moment'—a system of generalization, i.e., a system based upon the children's feelings of the 'moment,' i.e., based upon their desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment, reacting to the situation of the 'moment,' what all children have in common (equality or Equalité) and can build unity (consensus or Fraternité) upon in the social action or praxis of 'liberating' themselves from the father's/Father's authority system (Liberté)—instead. By explaining how and why facilitators of 'change' are coming between you and your children it will explain how and why facilitators' of 'change' are able to come between you and your elected representatives, turning them against 'representing' you, i.e., no longer recognizing and defending your inalienable—no man can put a lien upon—rights, but "representing" (serving and protecting) their (personal-collective) "self interests" of the 'moment' instead, i.e., 'creating' a government run by consensus, which is controlled (manipulated) by socialists-globalists-environmentalists, i.e., facilitators of 'change,' who are focused upon "solving" socialist-globalist-environmentalist "problems" only—which includes you and your family, property, and business—negating local control, representative, majority vote, separation of powers, constitutional republic (along with its Bill of Rights) government in the process, keeping it in name only in order to deceive the naive or ignorant.
    There is no true representation in the consensus process—which makes decisions according to the "feelings" of the 'moment'—as representation requires re-presenting another person's (the constituent's, i.e., the father's/Father's) position, which is based upon private convictions. The only pure representation ever demonstrated on the earth was (and is) by the Lord Jesus Christ's himself, who, though being equal with God, took on the form of a man—became as a child under a father's authority—obeyed His Heavenly Father in all things commanded, and thus was (is) able to say "If you have known/seen me you have known/seen the Father." (John 14:7, 9) In the consensus process, you can only respond (react) to the situation of the 'moment' that stimulates your "feelings" of the 'moment,' as in stimulus-response—something which animals do. Animals naturally react to situations. Only after proper training (programing) do they respond cognitively (though their cognition is still subject to their "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., the affective domain, making them subject to nature only).
    Such behavior (making law via the consensus process) would make laws subject to rapid 'change,' i.e., subject to the politicians, judges, leaders "feelings" of the 'moment," and the situation of the 'moment' that stimulates them, making laws subject to the facilitator of 'change,' who, by manipulating the situation of the 'moment' (as Pavlov, Skinner, and Thorndike—as lab technicians, i.e., as psychotherapists—set up the conditions to stimulate, evaluate, and program their dogs, rats, and chickens) "guarantees" his desired outcome, i.e., his control over the elected "representative" (and therefore his control over "the people" they "represent"), doing it all in the name of "the people." For example, if you go to court without a lawyer and the judge asks you where your lawyer is and you respond with "I am going to represent myself" he will correct you and say that you can not "represent" your self, you can only present yourself. There is no father's/Father's (constituents) authority, i.e., representation in the consensus process, only the participants personal "feelings" and "thoughts" of the 'moment,' which are subject to the situation of the 'moment,' which is subject to the manipulation of a facilitator of 'change,' "helping" "the group" determine the "appropriate information" in order to guarantee his desired outcome, consensus., i.e., the negation of the father's/Father's (the constituents) authority in determining how to respond to present and future situations. By the facilitator of 'change' drawing those loyal to the father's/Father's authority system into criticizing him, i.e., into questioning and challenging him (instead of removing him, demanding he leave, exposing him as a seducer, deceiver, and manipulator, i.e., as a liar)—who has taken on a semblance of authority in an effort to negate the participants respect for authority—he is able to "help" them manifest dissatisfaction with authority, putting their dissatisfaction into practice.

    As the children go, the nation goes. Replace the father's/Father's authority system, i.e., "private convictions," i.e., the guilty conscience for doing wrong, i.e., "civil law," i.e., representative government with the child's nature, i.e., with "self" 'justification,' i.e., with dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., with "civil disobedience," i.e., with the consensus process and you 'create' a nation grounded upon man's fallen nature only, i.e., a nation of unrighteousness and abomination. That is the guaranteed outcome, making all citizens subject to the laws of carnal man, i.e., to the child's carnal nature—to the law of the flesh and sin—only, with facilitators of 'change' using the consensus process in order to have the "representatives" and "the people" serve and protect them, 'liberating' themselves (and therefore the children) from the father's/Father's authority system.
    University professors would ask me, after looking at my class syllabus (requiring students to read—portions of—Kant, Hegel, Marx, Freud, Moreno, Gramsci, Lukács, Adorno, Fromm, Marcuse, Habermas, Lewin, Bennis, Benne, Bloom's Taxonomies, etc., i.e.,. It was an upper four hundred level class) "And how many students dropped out after your first class?" I was amazed (shocked) to discover how many students, though intelligent (four point students), could not think, i.e., could not put two plus two together and get four, or were not interested in thinking, thinking through their "feelings," i.e., through their carnal desires of the 'moment' only, instead. The following will require you to think.
    Having spent five years reading over 600 social-psychology books—many of which are required reading for a PhD in Education, Psychology, Sociology, Philosophy, etc.—taught in a University (on the dialectic process and its affect upon American institutions), and during the past twenty years traveled from coast to coast, giving over 5000 lectures (including radio and TV) on the dialectic process and its "affect" upon America, the following (cutting through the philosophical-sociological-psychological jargon*) explains how the dialectic process is being used to 'liberate' children (including college students) from parental authority, i.e., from the father's/Father's authority system—so that children can be "normal" again, therefore able to become united as one ("build relationship") upon their natural (carnal) desires of the 'moment' (upon their common "self interests"). *Believe me I have cut through the jargon. You know what I mean if you have ever read George Hegel's, Karl Marx's, or Sigmund Freud's writings, or any of their followers writings (for example: Kurt Lewin, Herbart Marcuse, Jürgen Habermas, or Norman O. Brown), or the writings of those who preceded them (Immanuel Kant for example)—see Sources above.
    In brief, the "new" world order is a society of children (in adult bodies), guided by their "feelings" of the 'moment,' being seduced, deceived, and manipulated by facilitators of 'change,' who, being seduced, deceived, and manipulated themselves, are 'purposed' in "helping" children (including those in adult bodies) 'liberate' themselves from the "old" world order of parental authority, i.e., negating the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system in their feelings, thoughts, and actions, and in their relationship with one another and the world, so that they (including the facilitator of 'change') can do wrong without having a guilty conscience, i.e., so that they can sin with impunity. "There is no fear of God before their eyes" sums up our current Facebook, "living in the 'moment,'" pleasure 'driven' and 'purposed' culture. (Romans 3:18) For example, the marriage vow could now read "for better or for worse, or until something better comes along." It is the difference between the "old" commands and rules, facts and truth, preaching and teaching, "top-down," i.e., father/Father (patriarch), faith (reasoning from commands, rules, facts and truth being preached and taught) and obedience based, i.e., self control and discipline, humbling and denying of self, having a guilty conscience for doing wrong world order and the "new" feelings, opinions, dialogue, and consensus, "Liberté, Equalité, Fraternité," i.e., facilitator of 'change' (heresiarch), sight ("reasoning" from your feelings of the 'moment') and disobedience based, i.e., police state, cameras on every street corner and in every store (because people no longer have a guilty conscience for doing wrong) world order. The 'change' (paradigm 'shift') is from "right and wrong" (morality and competence) which are established by parents, teachers, employers, and God himself, to man's "feelings," i.e., to his opinion of the 'moment' which is ever 'changing,' i.e., ever subject to the changing situation of the 'moment' (stimulus-response). As you will see, education (or rather re-education) is at the heart of the "new' world order, with "Bloom's Taxonomies" its bible, i.e., using "higher order thinking skills" on morals and ethics, negating the parent's (the father's/Father's) authority system in the child's feelings, thoughts, and actions, and in his relationship with others and the world in the process. "Bloom's Taxonomies" chart (pdf format) and Diaprax Chart (pdf format).
    The question is: If the consensus process is based upon "human nature," yet it does not come about naturally—requiring a facilitator of 'change' to initiate and sustain it—and the father's authority system is natural—reappearing in every generation—then how can those promoting the consensus process 'justify' themselves and their wicked deeds, negating the father's/Father's authority system and thereby the guilty conscience for doing wrong, i.e., for disobedience? The answer is by men being deceived, listening to facilitators of 'change,' submitting themselves to them for the "common good," having been told by them that their heart is neither "good" nor "evil," i.e., not "wicked" but has the potential of becoming "good" by doing "good" deeds for and with society, making everybody "feel good." This is why they insist that there are to be no "put down's," i.e., "negative" or "judgmental" statements made in the meeting, i.e., why they insist upon everybody being "positive," i.e., being tolerant of ambiguity, i.e., tolerant of deviancy, with everyone taking "ownership" of the process, i.e., being a "team player" and not being a "resister to 'change,'" thereby removing Godly restraint, i.e., the father's/Father's authority system from the outcome, establishing policy upon man's carnal nature only, instead, making unrighteous and abomination the law of the land, 'creating' a "new" world order where elected officials and government departments, agencies, and institutions can, as children of disobedience, in consensus with one another, satisfy their own "self interest" of the 'moment,' oppressing the people (while claiming to be serving and protecting "the people") with no accountability—having no guilty conscience for their praxis. "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9
    You are never deceived because somebody lied to you. You are deceived because you liked them and/or had something to gain from them, i.e., pleasure, including the pleasure of their approval, and therefore you trusted them. "Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD." Jeremiah 17:5 "Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths." Proverb. 3: 5-6

Dialectical "Reasoning"

    As strange as it may seem, the so called "new" world order, i.e., the dialectic process, i.e., the consensus process is based upon the carnal nature, i.e., the carnal feelings, thoughts, and actions of the child—as stated by George Hegel "The child, contrary to appearance, is the absolute, the rationality of the relationship; he is what is enduring and everlasting, the totality which produces itself once again as such." (George Hegel, System of Ethical Life) George Hegel's "once again as such" means, once the child's feelings, thoughts, and actions and relationship with others and the world, through dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., through "self" 'justification' (the system of Genesis 3:1-6)—which requires sight, i.e., that which is of the world only (including the imagination), questioning what is not of the world (that which is not rational, i.e., reasonable, i.e., practical, i.e., actual, i.e., common to all children/mankind in the current situation, i.e., in the 'moment,' i.e., in the "here-and now"), is 'liberated' from the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system (the system of Hebrews 12:5-11)—which requires faith in and obedience to that which is not (He who is not) "of and for" the child's world only. According to Hegel, through dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., through "self" 'justification,' i.e., through "reasoning," according to "good sense" (according to what seems practical, i.e., "good" to the child in the 'moment,' "good" being pleasure), evaluating the world from (for) himself or herself (aufheben), according to his or her own "sensuous needs" and "sense perception" of the 'moment,' i.e., "sense experience," the child is able to be himself again, as he was (carnal, of the world only), before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into his life—preventing him from being "normal," i.e., inhibiting or blocking him from satisfying his natural (carnal) desires of the 'moment'—with the child's use of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "self" 'justification," i.e., Genesis 3:1-6 negating the guilty conscience (Romans 7:14-25), i.e., negating his need to ask for forgiveness and repent for doing wrong, i.e., for sinning, i.e., according to dialectic 'reasoning,' for being "normal" (for being "reasonable," "practical," etc., according to his carnal nature and the situation of the 'moment'), i.e., for questioning and/or disobeying the father's/Father's commands and rules, negating his need to believe in, i.e., have faith in the father's/Father's facts and truth—in the Father's only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, who was obedient to His Heavenly Father in all things commanded (who, by His shed blood on the cross, 'redeemed' us from His Heavenly Father's wrath upon us for our disobedience, with his righteousness being imputed to us according to our faith in Him, and who by His resurrection 'reconciled' us to His Heavenly Father in order for us to take part in His holiness). Dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., children 'justifying' themselves (with themselves), "reasoning" with one another through dialogue, thus becomes the means to (the spirit of) world unity ("Making the world safe for Democracy"), negating the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system (sovereignty) which divides—above-below, saved-lost, light-darkness, sheep-goats, for us-against us, heaven-hell, etc.
    Philosophy, as well as psychology, sociology, etc. has always been about the father/Father - son/Son (parents - children, teacher - students, employer - employees, etc.,) relationship. Since the garden in Eden, where two "children" questioned and defied their "Father's" (God's, i.e., their creators) commands, rules, facts, and truth, all children have thought about how the world "is," subject to the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, and (imagined) how the world "ought" to be, according to their desires of the 'moment, with some going further, thinking (reasoning) how it "can" be when all the children of the world unite as one in thought and action, negating the father's/Father's authority system in their feelings, thoughts, and actions and in their relationship with one another, negating the father's/Father's authority system from the face of the world. While Jesus Christ 'reconciled' our relationship (individually) with His Heavenly Father (our creator), requiring faith (with obedience following), dialectic 'reasoning' negates His authority system, i.e., negates our faith in and obedience to Him, in our thoughts and actions instead, 'liberating' us to be "of and for our selves" only, i.e., "of and for" the world only, making the father/Father at-one-with the children of the world and the children of the world at-one-with the father/Father, making both children and father/Father subject to "human nature" and dialectic 'reasoning' ("As above, So below"), negating the father's/Father's authority system in the process.
    According to dialectic "logic," if the father's/Father's authority (demanding faith in his facts and truth and obedience to his commands and rules) is unnatural and the child's desire to be at-one-with the world in pleasure and dissatisfaction with parental restraint, i.e., resenting the father's/Father's authority system is natural, then "reasoning" can only come from the child, 'justifying' himself, 'liberating' himself from the father's/Father's authority system, becoming at-one-with the world in feelings, thought, and action, as well as in his relationship with the other children of the world (and in their relationship with him). This means, for 'change' to take place the facilitator of 'change' must take the place of the father/Father in the child's life, "helping" the child share his opinion, i.e., his thoughts with other children while they share their thoughts (opinions) with him—thoughts which are taken captive to their feelings of the 'moment,' i.e., their "self interests," i.e., their desire for pleasure, including the pleasure which comes from the approval of one another and their dissatisfaction with pain, including the emotional pain which comes from missing out on pleasure, as well as the emotional pain of being rejected or disapproved by one another (making them subject to sight, i.e., to sensuousness, i.e., to the carnal/temporal 'moment'). Thus, if 'change' is to take place, the child's nature (his desires and dissatisfactions) must be accepted as the Thesis, i.e., as the issue of importance, instead of the father/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth (which require faith in the father/Father, i.e., righteousness, leading to obedience, i.e., doing the father's/Father's will despite the pain, including the pain of missing out on the pleasures of the 'moment' as well as the pain of being rejected by or being disapproved of by others). In other words, if 'change' is to take place, sight, i.e., the situation and/or objects, i.e., the environment that stimulates the child's "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., that initiate and sustain his desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment,' i.e., that stimulate his "self interest," i.e., covetousness must take the place of faith, i.e., must take the place of externally imposed commands, rules, facts, and truth that restrain the child, i.e., that inhibit or block the child from pursuing his desires and expressing his dissatisfactions of the 'moment,' requiring that he humble, deny, control, discipline himself in order to do what is right and not do what is wrong.
    The "one for all and all for one" dictum applies here in that the child must be willing to allow all children the opportunity to share their thoughts (opinions or theories) of the 'moment,' as they allow him to share his thoughts (opinion or theory) of the 'moment.' The 'purpose' of those promoting dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., the facilitator of 'change' is to not only 'create' a world of pleasure, i.e., to augment pleasure, including affirmation, for the children (and therefore for the facilitator of 'change himself—so that he can do wrong without having a guilty conscience, i.e., so that he can sin with impunity), but also to 'create' a world of hatred (from the children) toward the authority figure, i.e., toward the father figure, i.e., toward the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system, i.e., toward the one who does not allow him to share his thoughts of the 'moment' freely—the father/Father and his authority now perceived by the child as being unreasonable (irrational, impractical, etc.), and therefore irrelevant in the life of the child. To augment pleasure (personal pleasure, i.e., the pleasures of the world, and social pleasure, i.e., the affirmation or approval of the other children), the child's thoughts of the 'moment'—his desires and dissatisfactions—must be allowed freedom of expression over the father's/Father's authority to restrain, negating the father's/Father's authority. Circumventing the father's/Father's authority, in an effort to augment pleasure, naturally, i.e., according to the child's carnal nature, engenders hatred in the child toward the father's/Father's authority, turning the child against the father/Father and his/His authority system, with hatred making itself manifest the next time the father/Father attempts to restrain the child. In this way the facilitator of 'change' does not have to tell the children to hate their parents, i.e., to question, challenge, disregard, and/or defy parental authority, they will do it naturally, defending the process and the facilitator of 'change' in the process. This is an insidious process that has plagued the world from the garden, where the master facilitator of 'change' first made his appearance to man (to the woman), "helping" two "children" 'liberate' themselves from the Father's authority.
    As Karl Marx expressed it: "The life [the power or authority] which he [the child, or in Marx's case the worker] has given to the object [to the father/Father, or to the property or business owner—by obeying him without receiving any personal satisfaction or pleasure from him in the 'moment' as well as without any pleasure coming from the work environment in the 'moment'] sets itself against him as an alien and hostile force." (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3) In other words, by the child (or worker) doing what he is told to do, against his own will—not in agreement with or counter to his own "self interest"—inhibiting or blocking him from pursuing his desires of the 'moment,' i.e., having to restraint, control, discipline, humble, deny himself instead, i.e., having no emotional ("subjective") reward ("ownership") in the project at hand, he (the child) "creates" the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system, i.e., he creates "an alien and hostile force," preventing 'change.' Emotion or the Affective Domain (pleasure, including the pleasure which comes from the approval or affirmation from others) must be a part of the project at hand or the child (or worker) has "capitulated" pleasure (and his carnal/social identity) to a force above (outside) himself, the pleasure of the 'moment' being abdicated to a reward which is to be received some time in the future, requiring faith in (dependence upon) the parent, land or business owner, or God.
    If the father's/Father's "top down" authority system, i.e., the pattern of Hebrews 12:5-11 is made the Thesis, i.e., the way it "is," then the child's nature, i.e., his carnal desires of the 'moment' along with his thoughts upon how the world "ought" to be (satisfying his carnal desires of the 'moment,' i.e., "human nature") becomes the source of conflict and tension, i.e., the Antithesis. With the father's/Father's authority to 1) preach commands and rules (to be obeyed) and teach facts and truth (to be accepted as is, by faith), to 2) "reward" or "bless" the child for doing good, i.e., for doing his/His will, to 3) "chasten" the child for doing wrong or for disobeying, i.e., for not doing his/His will, discussing with his child what he is to do (in greater detail) or what he has done wrong (at the father's/Father's discretion), and to 4) "cast out" the child who rejects his/His authority to do 1-4, a guilty conscience for disobedience, i.e., for doing wrong, i.e., the pattern of Romans 7:14-25 is engendered in the child, preventing 'change,' i.e., preventing Synthesis, i.e., preventing the child from becoming at-one-with the children of the world, i.e., inhibiting or blocking him from becoming subject to the seduction, deception, and manipulation of the facilitator of 'change.' Faith in the father's/Father's authority to chasten or cast out engenders a guilty conscience for doing wrong, i.e., for disobeying, preventing, i.e., inhibits or blocks 'change.' The dialectic system or process goes like this: 1) negate the father's/Father's authority ("right") to chasten or cast out (in the mind of the child) and 2) the guilty conscience for doing wrong or for disobeying is negated, engendering 'change.'
    Karl Marx wrote: "The philosophers have interpreted the world in many different ways, the objective however is to 'change' [verändern, i.e., to transform or modify] it." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis # 11) Children are "philosophers" by nature—thinking about how the world "is," unfair (unjust), i.e., under parental control, thinking about how it "ought" to be, fair (just), i.e., where they can do what they want to do when they want to do it, and imagining how it "can" be, beautiful and free, without parental authority. They do not mind having the parent around, for security and needs satisfaction sake, as long as they do not tell them what they can or can not do, i.e., insist upon them having faith in their facts and truth and obey their commands and rules when they do not make sense (are "un-reasonable," i.e., non-sensual) to them. Thus, when subjective truth (proceeding from the child) and objective truth (proceeding from the world), i.e., emotion and motion ("reason" and action, "theory and practice," consensus and praxis) come together as one, in the 'moment,' then 'change' (synthesis or transformation) becomes 'reality.' According to Karl Marx (and Sigmund Freud), all that is needed is a facilitator of 'change' (big brother) to "help" the children to accomplish their dreams, i.e., to make their imagination, i.e., their world 'reality,' preventing them from forcing their dreams on others (as their parents did). At least that is what "the plan" was.
    Thus, according to dialectic 'reasoning,' when the child's desires are restrained by the father's/Father's authority, dissatisfaction with the father's/Father's authority is engendered in the child, engendering reasoning (the child dialoguing within himself, 'justifying himself, i.e., "self" 'justification'). When reason ("self" 'justification') is made manifest (through "group dialogue") and put into action, the father's/Fathers authority system is negating in the children's feelings, thoughts, and actions and in their relationship with one another and the world. In social action (praxis) the children actualize themselves, with reasoning ("self" 'justification') becoming their savior. Reasoning needs the father's/Father's authority to engender dissatisfaction in the children, with children turning to reasoning instead of the father/Father, i.e., disregarding, questioning, challenging, disrespecting, disobeying, defying, dishonoring, and/or attacking the father's/Father's authority in order to become themselves. According to Transformational Marxists, i.e., group psychotherapists, i.e., facilitators of 'change,' it is not reasoning alone that saves the child, it is reasoning (dissatisfaction with authority) being put into action (social action or praxis), negating the father's/Father's authority system in society, that saves the child and society, making the child and society one.
    Karl Marx's opinion or theory (dictum) is being carried out in the classroom today through the use of psychology, i.e., group psychotherapy. "Bloom's Taxonomies," which are being used as curriculum in the classroom today, is Marxist in ideology. Curriculum guides the teacher in how and what to teach the children. In this case, with the child's "feelings" of the 'moment' (with the affective domain being subject to sight, i.e., taken captive to the situation) supplanting memorizing and applying "facts and truth" (which requires having faith in and obeying the teacher), it instructs the teacher in how to teach the children to think and act and relate with or respond to one another, the world, and authority in the classroom, "affecting" how they will relate or respond to one another, the world, and authority outside the classroom. Benjamin Bloom wrote (concerning his first book: Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Book 1: Cognitive Domain): "Certainly the Taxonomy was unproved at the time it was developed and may well be 'unprovable.'" (Benjamin Bloom, Forty Year Evaluation) His education (re-education) curriculum, which includes his second book, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Book 2: Affective Domain, is based upon the works of Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud (with Marxism being synthesized with Freud via. group psychotherapy and the "group grade")—both books 1 and 2 (which have been modified by Marzano and Webb over the years—Common Core was Webb's rendition of Bloom's Taxonomies) are required praxis (application) for teacher certification and school accreditation today. Despite being "theories," they are being applied in the classroom anyway—'changing' the children in the name of 'change,' fulfilling Marx's' agenda, i.e., 'liberating' children from the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system, so that they can be carnal, i.e., "of and for self" and the world only, i.e., globalists, humanists, communists, i.e., "Making the world safe for democracy" by "building relationship upon self interest," i.e., by what all children have in common, i.e., their carnal desire for (love of) pleasure and their dissatisfaction with (hatred toward) restraint and the restrainer.
    Love engenders hate, i.e., love of pleasure engenders hate of restraint, i.e., hatred toward the restrainer. You can not hate someone without them restraining you (perceived or real) from having access to the person(s) or the thing(s) you love, i.e., that you gain pleasure from. When you love someone, you, by nature, hate whoever prevents, i.e., blocks or inhibits you from "having relationship" with them, in the 'moment.' If you love your father, for example, you hate your "self" for disobeying him. But, it you love your "self," you, by nature, hate your father for keeping you from having what it is you want when you want it, i.e., your "self interest." The same is true for objects you love. By "building relationships upon self interest," hatred toward the father's/Father's authority system, i.e., toward Godly restraint, i.e., toward nationalism, i.e., toward sovereignty, i.e., toward "Mine. Not yours" is naturally engendered in all who participate.
    The father's/Father's "top-down" authority system can only be overcome (negated) through the child's use of dialectic 'reasoning, i.e., through "self" 'justification,' i.e., through the pattern of Genesis 3:1-6, allowing the child to be at-one-with, i.e., in Synthesis (consensus) with nature, i.e., "of and for self" and the world only, in thought and in action, i.e., "in theory and practice," where all children, with their personal desires, i.e., their "self interests" can become at-one-with one another, i.e., in a "group," with their actions (building relationships and building projects together as one) become one and the same, i.e., unite in consensus, i.e., in a "feeling" of "oneness," 'creating' a world of "can"—where nothing is impossible (in their eyes). Thus they no longer need a savior, having saved themselves (with themselves), i.e., having, through dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., through "self" 'justification' 'reconciled' their "self" with their "selves," in a world of pleasure (Eros), 'redeeming' their "self" from the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system in the process, even calling it (their love for one another, void the father's/Father's love which chastens) agape.
    Hegel's "Particular" is bound up in the isolated child being "repressed," i.e., having to humble, deny, control, discipline his "self," i.e., acting according to his father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, having to do the father's/Father's will, "alienating" his "self" from himself as well as from others, yet thinking about how the world "ought" to be, 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority system (faith and obedience), subject to a system of "reasoning," i.e., to the world of "feelings" and sight instead. Hegel's "Universal" is all children uniting their "self," i.e., becoming at-one-with each other and the world through their use of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., 'justifying' their "self" with themselves, 'liberating' their "self" from the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system. Hegel's gesellschaft, where your worth is bound to your participation in (finding oneness with) "the village," i.e., 'discovering' your identity within "the group" or the community, negates gemeinschaft, where your worth is as an individual, whether you are working for or with the "the village," i.e., "the group" or the community or not.
    The "self" of the child sees the child as god, doing no wrong in and of himself, worshiping the child, 'justifying' him as he is, making the child righteous in his own eyes, able to evaluate good and evil according to his own nature, as God (mimesis). When the child finds "oneness" (consensus) with other children of the same "self interest" he and they become as god (singular) in their eyes, deceiving themselves in believing that they, i.e., "the group" (along with and especially the facilitator of 'change') can do no wrong, only doing things "badly"—with somebody not doing their part, if and when things go badly. It is in this nature, i.e., in man's fallen nature (which made itself manifest in the garden with the woman listening to a facilitator of 'change,' "helping" her to become herself "again as such"), that dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. "Reasoning," i.e., "self 'justification' (enlightenment, illumination) does it deed, deceiving the woman and the man (and the children) into believing that they are "one" collectively, becoming one (god) in their carnal desires and dissatisfactions, blinding them to who they really are (the created, as individuals—therefore not righteous in and of themselves) and who God is (the creator, who alone is righteous in and of himself), and the consequences of their carnal actions (praxis), i.e., judgment and damnation and their need to ask for forgiveness and repent. In dialectic 'reasoning' the 'drive' and the 'purpose' of life is for the children of the world to save their "self," i.e., to 'liberate' their "self" (collectively) from the father's/Father's authority system by negating the father's/Father's authority system (individually) in their feelings, thoughts, and actions, and in their relationship with one another and the world.
    By dialoging their opinions to a consensus and putting it into practice, i.e., into social action (praxis) they are able to "actualize" their "self," finding their identity in the "whole," i.e., in the "absolute," i.e., in that which is "of and for self," i.e., in that which is "of and for nature," i.e., in that which is "of and for the world" only, establishing themselves over and therefore against the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system. If you understand this, you understand the 'drive' and the 'purpose' of the so called "new" world order, which is not new, being as "new" as Genesis 3:1-6, where a facilitator of 'change' came into the Garden in Eden, i.e., into the "room" per se, coming between the Father and his "children," "helping" them 'justify' themselves, i.e., to be themselves, i.e., to be of the world only, "helping" them 'liberate' their "self" from the Father's "top-down" authority system.
    "For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." 1 John 2:16 When children 'justify' their "self," i.e., their "sensuous needs," i.e., their "lust of the flesh," and their "sense perception," i.e., their "lust of the eyes," approving or affirming their "selves" in the consensus process, i.e., in what is "the pride of life," i.e., the approval (affirmation) of men ('justifying' their carnal "self interests"), they harden their hearts against the father/Father and his/His authority, blinding themselves to the consequence of their praxis in the process. "There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 16:25 "O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps." Jeremiah 10:23 "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6 While the earthly father is not perfect (he could be a downright tyrant or absent), his office is, having been given to him by God, to serve under Him in. Yet division comes between the child and the earthly father when the Heavenly Father, through His Son, becomes the Father, unless both accept Him as their Father. "And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven." Matthew 23:9 It is in negating the Heavenly Father's authority that dialectic 'reasoning establishes its 'purpose,' and it is in the Heavenly Father, and His Son Jesus Christ that, for the believer, life is found. "And truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." 1 John 3:1
    The so called "new" world order is in essence facilitators of 'change,' i.e., group psychotherapists "helping" children praxis (practice) dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., Genesis 3:1-6, i.e., "self" 'justification' in order to negate the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system, i.e., Hebrews 12:5-11, i.e., the "old" world order in order to negate the guilty conscience, i.e., Romans 7:14-25, making the law of the flesh, i.e., the law of sin, i.e., "human nature" the law of the land, so that man can sin, i.e., praxis unrighteousness and abomination with impunity, i.e., without having a guilty conscience. In other words, the 'purpose' of those promoting dialectic 'reasoning' (the "new" world order), i.e., the facilitators of 'change,' i.e., the group psychotherapist is to 'liberate' children from the affect the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system ("doing right and not wrong" according to the father's/Father's will, i.e., "prejudice") has upon them, i.e., upon their feelings, thoughts, and actions, and upon their relationship with one another and the world.
    According to dialectic 'logic,' the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system creates neurosis in children—creates a "guilty conscience" in them when they are doing or are thinking about doing what comes natural to them, disobeying or thinking about disobeying their father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth—resulting in children repressing themselves against their own nature which then leads to them preaching and teaching their father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth to one another, defending their father's/Father's position, "prejudicing" themselves against one another, judging one another for doing wrong, making one another "feel bad," i.e., feel guilty, thus alienating themselves from one another. Unless the child is able to freely (safely, i.e., with approval or affirmation) express his feelings and thoughts (his observations or evaluation, i.e., aufheben) through dialogue, what he is doing within himself already, he will remain neurotic, repressed, and alienated.
    According to dialectic 'logic,' only by facilitators of 'change' "helping" children 'justify' their carnal nature, i.e., their impulses and urges of the 'moment, only through children learning to use dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "self" 'justification,' only by facilitators of 'change' 'creating' a "healthy environment" for children, i.e., a "safe zone," i.e., an "experiential chasm" for children, void of the father's/Father's authority system—where children, through dialogue, i.e., through sharing their opinions (their "thoughts" of the 'moment,' which are taken captive to their "feelings" of the 'moment,' which are stimulated by the situation of the 'moment,' which is manipulated by the facilitator of 'change') with one another without "prejudice," i.e., without insisting upon or defending their father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., without being "negative"—can children find "common ground," i.e., can they through affirmation experience consensus with one another, and putting it into practice, called praxis, be restored to the way they felt, thought, and acted, and related with themselves and the world before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into their lives, learning to relate with one another in the same way, according to their "sensuous needs" and "sense perception" of the 'moment,' i.e., according to that which is "of and for nature Only." "In the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself in the other, they experience the common ground of their existence [all that is of the world only]." (Jürgen Habermas, Knowledge & Human Interest)
    According to dialectic 'logic,' only through children learning to use dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., learning to 'justify' themselves (with one another) through the dialoguing of their opinions to a consensus can the father's/Father's authority system , i.e., the preaching and teaching of commands, rules, facts, and truth to be accepted as is, i.e., by faith (equated to nationalism, i.e., fascism) be negated in their feelings, thoughts, and actions and in their relationship with one another and the world, negating neurosis, repression, and alienation, i.e., negating the guilty conscience for doing wrong, i.e., for disobeying the father/Father, for questioning and challenging the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, for disrespecting and defying the father's/Father's authority system. Thus, only through children (the next generation of citizens) learning to use dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., 'justifying' themselves as "children of disobedience" and putting it into practice, can they (united as one over and therefore against the father's authority system) create a world (a "new" world order) of Liberté, Equalité, Fraternité, i.e., can they initiate and sustain a world of perpetual 'change,' i.e., a world void of ('liberated' from) parental/Godly restraint, i.e., a world "of and for self," i.e., "of and for" human nature (the child's carnal nature) only, i.e., "of and for" unrighteousness and abomination.

Important information for all parents (and children) to know—whether homeschooling or not: Homeschooling and the Dialectic Process. (pdf) Exam. (pdf)

The Ramification of Dialectic "Reasoning."

If this is accepted, i.e., making "human nature," i.e., the child's carnal nature, i.e., his desires (impulses and urges) of the 'moment,' i.e., his desire for pleasure, including the pleasure which comes from the approval of men, approving of his pleasure and his dissatisfaction with pain, including his dissatisfaction with (the pain which comes with) the father's/Father's restraints and disapproval—inhibiting or blocking him from participating in the pleasure of the 'moment,' whether imagined or real—the standard for life, instead of the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, then George Hegel's next statement, sounding more like Karl Marx (who was not yet born), becomes 'reality.' When parent's become as children, 'driven' by pleasure, 'purposed' in augmenting pleasure, over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority system, then the following becomes the outcome.
    "On account of the absolute and natural oneness of the husband, the wife, and the child, ... the surplus is not the property of one of them ... all contracts regarding property or service and the like fall away ... the surplus, labour, and property are absolutely common to all, inherently and explicitly." (George Hegel, System of Ethical Life) In this way, through the use of dialectic 'reasoning,' facilitators of 'change' ("big brother"), coming between your and your children, i.e., negating the father's "top-down" authority system in your children's feelings, thoughts, and actions, and in their relationship with one another (in society), gain control over your children, making them their servants, i.e., slaves, living off your labor and money, i.e., taxing you, forcing you to support their unrighteous and abominable ways. There is a price to pay when you base 'reality' upon the nature of the child (and your desire for their approval), basing right upon the pleasures of the 'moment,' pain or wrong being the lack thereof. Anyone (especially those with have the power of government in hand) who attains or desires to attain pleasure from your spouse, your children, your property, your business, or you, has as much "right" to them (or you) as you do, i.e., you have not right to restrain them. If you try, you will be restrained or "removed."

The Scriptures Warn Us About Our Use of Dialectic "Reasoning" and How to Overcome It.

"But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived." turning man away from the Father and the Son. (2 Timothy 3:13) The only way to not be seduced and deceived is to have faith in and follow after Christ Jesus, doing His Heavenly Father's will. "And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily [be willing to be rejected by others], and follow me." Luke 9:23 "For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother." Matthew 12:50 "For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;" 2 Corinthians 10:3-6 "But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven." Matthew 10:33 While some claim that they "know God," they live contrary. "They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate." Titus 1:16 "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my father which is in heaven." Matthew 7:21 Negate the father's/Father's authority system and you negate faith. "But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." Hebrews 11:6

It is no wonder then why Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud focused upon negating the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system in society (Karl Marx) and in the individual (Sigmund Freud).
    Karl Marx wrote: "once the earthly family [with the earthly father's "top-down" authority system restraining the children] is discovered to be the secret of the holy family [with the Heavenly Father's "top-down" authority system restraining man], the former [the earthly father's "top-down" authority system] must itself be annihilated [vernichtet] theoretically and practically [in the child's feelings, thoughts, and actions and in his relationship with himself, others, and the world]." (Karl Marx, Theses On Feuerbach #4)
    Karl Marx wrote: "It is not individualism [the child under the parent's/God's authority system, being personally held accountable to them for his thoughts and actions, having a guilty conscience (neurosis) for disobeying or thinking about disobeying them, in order to do what he wants to do in the 'moment,' "repressing" himself in order to do their will, "alienating" himself from others and others being "alienated" from him because of his ridged (parent's or God's) position on issues, or isolating himself, doing what he wants to do when he wants to do it, but for himself alone] that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society ["the group," "human relationship based upon 'self interest,'" 'compromising' or setting aside the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth in order to "get along" with one another, in order to come to a consensus, i.e., in order to come to a "feeling" of "oneness"] is the necessary framework through which freedom and individuality [freedom from the father's/Father's authority system and freedom to do as one desires in the 'moment,' i.e., to be carnal, i.e., to be of the world only, with group approval, ,i.e., with "affirmation"] are made realities." (Karl Marx, quoted in John Lewis, The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx) For Marx, instead of "human nature," i.e., the child's carnal nature, and therefore society being restrained by the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system, "human nature," i.e., the children disregarding, questioning, challenging, disrespecting, disobeying, defying, dishonoring, and/or attacking the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system must become the foundation upon which the home and society are built. "Not feeling at home in the sinful world, Critical Criticism [Reasoning] must set up a sinful world in its own home." (Karl Marx, The Holy Family)
    Sigmund Freud wrote: "'it is not really a decisive matter whether one has killed one's father or abstained from the deed,' if the function of the conflict and its consequences are the same [that is, the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system no longer has relevance to the child]." (Sigmund Freud as quoted in Herbart Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: A philosophical inquiry into Freud)
    "Freud noted that patricide [the children killing and "devouring" their father, negating his authority over them] and incest [the children carrying out their carnal impulses and urges of the 'moment,' i.e., having sensual (sexual) relationship with their mother and one another] are part of man's deepest nature." (Irvin Yalom, The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy) Freud, believing that all children were sexually active, saw sex as being the greatest pleasure of all. Therefore, according to Freud, the only way to 'liberate' man, i.e., to 'liberate' the sexual nature of the child in man, was to 'create' a "new" world order based upon the nature of the child, "helping" the child 'liberate' his "Self" from the father's/Father's authority system, making his "Self," i.e., his carnal desires of the 'moment' ("of 'Self'") the 'drive' of life and the augmentation of pleasure ("for 'Self'") the 'purpose' of life. Explaining Freud's "historiography," Herbart Marcuse wrote : "the hatred against patriarchal suppression—a ‘barrier to incest,' ... the desire (for the sons) to return to the motherculminates in the rebellion of the exiled sons, the collective killing and devouring of the father, and the establishment of the brother clan [what Freud called "the neuroses of civilization"]," (Herbart Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: a psychological inquiry into Freud) "The individual is emancipated in the social group." "Freud commented that only through the solidarity of all the participants could the sense of guilt be assuaged." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)

It took Transformational Marxists, i.e., facilitators of 'change,' i.e., group psychotherapists (who merged Marx with Freud and Freud with Marx) to overcome (negate) the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system, not only in the individual, i.e., in the child, but in society, i.e., in "the group" as well (including the "church"), with the child finding identity, i.e., finding purpose for life in "the group" instead of in doing the father's/Father's will. This is the heart and soul of the consensus (soviet) form of government.

"Bypassing the traditional channels of top-down decision making, our objective centers upon transform public opinion into an effective instrument of global politics." "Individual values must be measured by their contribution to common interests and ultimately to world interests.... transforming public consensus into one favorable to the emergence of a stable and humanistic world order." "Consensus is both a personal and a political step. It is a precondition of all future steps." (Ervin Laszlo, A Strategy for the Future: The Systems Approach to World Order)

"Education" has "shifted" away from (and therefore against) "right-wrong" based thinking, i.e., away from authority, i.e., away from the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system—righteousness/doing right and not wrong according to the parent's standards, i.e., traditional education, where teachers, reflecting the parent's authority (in loco parentis), preach rules and commands to be obeyed and teach facts and truth to be accepted as is, by faith toward where now the children's "feelings" of the 'moment' are the basis of thinking, i.e., toward "opinion" based thinking, i.e., toward the children's desire of the 'moment'—sensuousness/approaching pleasure and avoiding pain/love of self and the world and hate of restraint (with children thinking about how their world "is," still subject to their parent's authority, how it "ought" to be, affirming their "feelings" of the 'moment,' and how it "can be," 'liberated' from parental authority—read all of philosophy, psychology, sociology, anthropology, etc., i.e., man's understanding and "wisdom," i.e., sight based 'reasoning' and "management"), i.e., transformational education, where facilitator's of 'change' "encourage" children to dialogue their opinions amongst one another—to a consensus—and put it into practice, i.e., into praxis. This so called "shift" is known as a "Paradigm 'shift'"—a 'shift' away from (and therefore against) the Patriarchal Paradigm of self control and discipline, humbling and denying of self and obedience to parents (being rewarded in the future, in the "there-and-then" for "doing right and not doing wrong" in the "here-and-now," according to the parents' commands, rules, facts, and truth) to the Heresiarchal Paradigm of children 'liberating' and esteeming their "self," i.e., "actualizing" themselves (desiring and demanding reward, i.e., pleasure, including the pleasure of "'group' approval" or affirmation in the "here-and-now"), therefore disregarding, questioning, challenging, disrespecting, disobeying, defying, dishonoring, and/or attacking their parent's authority, engendering a culture of "children of disobedience," i.e., of patricide and incest, the hallmark of psychotherapy.

Every parent should know about their child's classroom experience and reading material (from grade school to College): how and why facilitators of 'change' are coming between the father and his children, as the Serpent came between "the Father and His 'children'" in the garden in Eden, "helping" children praxis dialectic 'reasoning, i.e., '"self ' justification,'" i.e., "helping" children 'liberate,' i.e., save (preserve) their "self" from the father's/Father's authority system through their use of dialectic 'reasoning' (Selbst Erhaltung, i.e., self preservation through their use of Vernunft, i.e., Reasoning, i.e., "good sense"), "progressively" moving their feelings, thoughts, and actions, and relationship with one another and the world away from "doing right and not wrong" (according to their parent's standards) toward not just thinking about but also doing what they "feel" like doing in the 'moment,' i.e. uniting "theory and practice." If, in the classroom, you "help" children 'justify' their carnal desires of the 'moment,' ("peace and affirmation," i.e., pleasure and group approval) they will establish their "feelings" of the 'moment' over and therefore against the father's "top-down" authority system, i.e., they will question and challenge their parents, i.e., their parent's authority, when they get home. Again, if you create (stimulate) the right environment in the classroom, the response will manifest itself in the home, with the children, in the kitchen, challenging their parent's authority, calling their parent's irrational ("You don't understand"), treating them as irrelevant (their way of thinking and behaving as being "out of date" in a 'changing' world), i.e., demanding their own way, doing "their own thing," in defiance to their parents authority (with "'group' approval" or affirmation). While the father and mother are not perfect, they could be down right tyrants, their office of authority is perfect. It is given to them by God, to serve under Him in, doing right and not wrong according to His will. It is not how far down the dialectic road of self 'justification' the children have gone, it is that they are on it that engenders 'change,' i.e., that engenders disrespect and defiance toward authority, i.e., that engenders unrighteousness and abomination. It is how we have arrived at where we are today as a culture.

Through the use of dialogue in a "group" setting ("dialogue group," "consensus group," "group therapy," "youth group," etc.), children, with "'group' approval" or "affirmation," are able to ''liberate' and 'justify' their "thoughts" (opinions, i.e., desires and dissatisfactions) of the 'moment,' i.e., have pleasure or "peace" initiating and sustaining relationship with themselves and the world in the 'moment' without having a "guilty conscience" while questioning and challenging their parent's authority, i.e., disobeying their parents, i.e., doing wrong. By putting their 'common' opinions, i.e., their common "feelings," i.e., their common desire for pleasure and common dissatisfaction toward restraint (consensus) into "group," social, or "community" action (praxis) they are able to satisfy (actualize) their own and others "feelings" (desires or self interests) of the 'moment,' negating the father's/Father's authority system (the "guilty conscience" for disobedience and/or for doing wrong) in their feelings, thoughts, and actions, and in their relationship with one another in the process.

Through their use of dialectic 'reasoning' in the "group grade," i.e., "group psychotherapy" classroom environment—with "educators," i.e., facilitators of 'change,' i.e., psychotherapists, i.e.., Transformational Marxists "helping" them (the father's children) "discuss" (dialogue with one another) personal-social "problems," i.e., openly share their desires and dissatisfactions (making them subject to the "carrot" of attaining their desires which are blocked or inhibited by the father's/Father's authority system but which are approved or affirmed by the "group," including their desire for "group" approval or affirmation and the "stick" of "group" disapproval—fearing their missing out on the pleasures they desire, including the pleasure of "group" approval or affirmation—choosing the approval or affirmation of the "group" over and therefore against the parent's approval)—children no longer have a "guilty conscience" questioning and challenging their parent's authority, i.e., disobeying their parents, i.e., doing wrong. Establishing their desires ("self interest") of the 'moment (including their desire for "group" approval or affirmation) over and therefore against "doing right and not wrong" (according to their parent's standards), students (the father's children) in the "group grade" classroom end up establishing the "groups" "feelings" of the 'moment' over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority system., i.e., doing right and not wrong, i.e., thinking and acting according to their parent's and/or God's standards. With "educators," i.e., facilitators of 'change, i.e., group psychotherapists "re-educating" the father's children in the classroom, the "Educational Objective" of the school system today is to "help" children (the next generation of citizens) negate (wash from their brain) the father's/Father's authority system in their feelings, thoughts, and actions, and in their relationship with one another, so that they can do wrong without having a guilty conscience, i.e., so that they can sin with impunity. "Prior to therapy the person is prone to ask himself, 'What would my parents want me to do?' During the process of therapy the individual comes to ask himself, 'What does it mean to me?'" (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy) This praxis in the classroom carries over into all fascists of society, 'creating' a world of 'change,' i.e., a world 'liberated' from parental/Godly restraint, i.e., initiating and sustaining a culture of 'lusts' and 'pride,' i.e., a world of unrighteousness and abomination.

    "In fact, a large part of what we call 'good teaching' is the teacher's ability to attain affective objectives ['liberating' the children's' feelings, i.e., their desires of the 'moment' and their dissatisfaction with restraint] through challenging the student's fixed beliefs [getting the students to question and challenge the father's/Father's authority system in order to initiate and sustain 'change,' i.e., in order to be a part of the "group"]." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals: Handbook 2, Affective Domain)
    Both Cognitive and Affective Domain Books (Book 1 and Book 2), commonly referred to as "Bloom's Taxonomies," have been updated by Marzano and Webb. All teachers must learn how to apply them ("Bloom's Taxonomies") in the classroom if they are to be "certified." All institutions of learning, including "Christian" (from the pre-school to the University and beyond—including the workplace, i.e., the military, police, medical/"health care"/child to elder "care," political, legal/judicial, contractual with the government/"public-private partnerships," etc.,) must use them (their method) as their curriculum if they are to be "accredited." Replacing the preaching of commands and rules to be obeyed and the teaching of facts and truth to be accepted as is (by faith) in the classroom with the students dialoguing their opinions to a consensus 'changes' the students,' i.e., 'changes' the way they feel, think, and act and relate with one another and the world, negating respect for authority and having a guilty conscience for disobedience, directly affecting the next generation of citizens and the laws they initiate and sustain—engendering laws of unrighteousness and abomination.

    All facilitators of 'change' are deceivers and liars, backing down as far as is necessary (when exposed) in order to maintain their position of authority (like the old Marxist waltz, i.e., with them taking you two steps forward until you squeal, then one step back—with you then thinking that you have won—then two steps forward, etc., until they have waltzed you across the floor,with you thinking all the while that you are in control), i.e., in order to, as pedophiles or pimps, seduce, deceive, and manipulate children or you for their own pleasure and gain. "If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, the predicted behaviors will follow." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)
    The Word of God warns us of this praxis: "And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you ;" 2 Peter 2:22 Through knowing your "lusts," i.e., your "carnal desires," i.e., your "self interest" of the 'moment,' i.e., what you "covet"—'discovered' through you dialoguing your opinion with others—facilitators of 'change' are able to seduce you (with your carnal desires or "self interest"). "The individual may have 'secret' thoughts which he will under no circumstances reveal to anyone else if he can help it. To gain access is particularly important, for precisely here may lie the individual's potential for democratic or antidemocratic thought and action in crucial situations." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) Then, using "feigned words," i.e., "plastic words," i.e., saying they are "helping you" when they, in reality, are "helping" themselves to you, they are able to deceive you. Gaining your trust, they then are able to use you for their own gain, getting you to 'justify' and work to initiate and sustain your, i.e., their carnal ways, manipulating you, buying and selling you as "merchandise" for their own pleasure and gain. This is the roll and goal, i.e., the drive and purpose of the facilitator of 'change.'

Diaprax is the dialectic process, i.e., the 'justification' of "Self" (Selbsterhaltung—'self' preservation), i.e., the dialoguing of opinions ("self interests") to a consensus (to a "feeling" of "oneness") over and therefore against the father'/Father's authority system being put into social action (praxis). It is the praxis of using dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "good sense" (Vernunft) in order to establish the child's "feelings" over and therefore against "unnatural" restraints (that which requires faith and obedience), i.e., over and therefore against parental authority—which prevents (inhibits or blocks) the child from satisfying (actualizing) his or her natural (carnal) desires of the 'moment,' that which he has in common with all the children of the world. It is the same procedure (dialectic, consensus, or soviet process) being used on adults in local, state, and national, secular and religious meetings today where policy is being made in order (as "new" world order) to initiate and sustain 'change'—'liberating' man from Godly (the Father's) restraint, i.e., opening "Pandora's box," a box full of evils (wickedness), which, once opened, can not be closed—resulting in government no longer "serving and protecting" the traditional family (the father's authority over his family, property, and business) but "serving and protecting" unrighteousness and abomination (socialism, i.e., the diverse or rather deviant impulses and urges of society) instead. "The affective domain is, in retrospect, a virtual 'Pandora's Box." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals: Handbook 2, Affective Domain) The scriptures warn us of our "affective domain." "The heart is deceitful ... and desperately wicked ...?" Jeremiah 17:9

The father's/Father's authority system (parental/Godly restraint) engenders a "guilty conscience" in children, making them "feel bad" for doing wrong—in their feelings, thoughts, and actions, and in their relationship with one another—thus (according to those promoting dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., facilitators of 'change') engendering "repression" and "alienation." It is the objective of those promoting dialectic 'reasoning' to 'liberate' the children's natural (carnal) desires of the 'moment,' thus 'liberating' their natural dissatisfaction (resentment or hatred) toward authority, not only in their feelings, thoughts, and actions of the 'moment,' but in the relationship they have with one another as well. It is therefore the praxis of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "building relationship upon 'Self interest,'" i.e., putting dialectic 'reasoning' (questioning and challenging authority—without having a "guilty conscience," i.e., without "feeling" bad in doing so—with "'group' approval" or "affirmation") into social action (called praxis) that results in unrighteousness and abomination (sinning with impunity) becoming the law of the land (with man serving the laws of the flesh and sin over and therefore against the commands of God—what Immanuel Kant called "lawfulness without law," i.e., the law of the man's carnal nature—concupiscence, i.e., man's natural lust of the flesh and eyes and the pride of life or self will, i.e., sin—'liberated' from the commands or restraints of God, resulting in man loving—lusting after—the pleasures of the 'moment, i.e., himself and the world [that which is "positive"], hating those who preach and teach Godly restraint [those who are "negative"). By removing (negating) the law—which engenders a guilty conscience, man becomes "normal," i.e., of the world, i.e., of the law of his carnal nature only, again., as he was before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into his life, with the law of sin, i.e., the law of the flesh becoming his master. This is why dialectic 'reasoning' is referred to as "the negation of negation." "No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." Luke 16:13 "If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him." 1 John 2:15b

No father gives his children commands, rules, facts, and truth to be accepted as is (by faith) and obeyed and then tells them to 'compromise' them if they get in the way of their initiating and/or sustaining relationship with others and/or the world, i.e., their "self interest" of the 'moment.' The consensus (dialectic) process does just that, "encouraging" children to "set aside" the father's commands, rules, facts, and truth (negate the father's/Father's authority system in their feelings, thoughts, and actions, and in their relationship with others) in order to "get along" with others, i.e., in order (as in "new" world order) to become at-one-with the world, negating the father's voice in them, i.e., the "guilty conscience" for doing wrong in the process, thus 'liberating' others from the father's commands, rules, facts, and truth by not bringing them up—only bringing them up in contempt, i.e., as something to overcome (negate).

"Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry: For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience: In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them." Colossians 3:5-7

    World peace and social harmony ("Worldly peace, i.e., pleasure and Socialist harmony, i.e., 'justification'" ), i.e., globalism i.e., "Making the world safe for Democracy," "Building relationship upon self interest" can not be initiated and sustained while the father's/Father's authority system (the "guilty conscience" for disobeying and/or for doing wrong) is still in place in the children's' thoughts and actions, initiating and sustaining "private convictions," preventing, i.e., inhibiting or blocking 'change.' A little dialectic 'reasoning' goes a long ways. If 'justified' and practiced in one area of the child's life (even for "good"), it will eventually be 'justified' and practiced in all areas of the child's life.
    Communism (common-ism) is the praxis of "building relationship" or "community" through the use of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., through "Self" 'justification,' using the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process, i.e., using the groups "feelings" (desires and dissatisfactions) of the 'moment' to establish policy, i.e., to determine "right" from "wrong" for the 'moment,' i.e. for the current situation, making 'change' the law of the land. "Jurisprudence of terror takes two forms; loosely defined rules which produces unpredictable law, and spontaneous changes in rules to best suit the state [i.e., to best suit those facilitating the consensus 'meeting']." (R. W. Makepeace and Croom Helm, Marxist Ideology and Soviet Criminal Law) While hard line Marxists, i.e., Traditional Marxists used outright force to initiate and sustain Communism (common-ism), "contemporary" Marxists, i.e., Transformational Marxists, facilitator's of 'change, psychotherapists (all four being the same) use the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus to achieve the same end (using force or the threat of it, i.e., crime only to move the process along, claiming they are against "violence" all the while). The Berlin wall did not come down because communism was defeated. It came down because communism had succeeded, in the form of a "velvet revolution," i.e., through the use of the classroom, the consensus process (bipartisanship), the use of crime and crisis, and social media to influence (control) "the people."

The following information explains how and why the dialectic process ("Self" 'justification') is being put into social action (praxis). Praxis is the consensus process (dialectic 'reasoning,'"Self 'justification,'" i.e., you evaluating your "Self" and the world around you according to your "Self interest," i.e., according to your carnal desires of the 'moment' and responding accordingly—aufheben) being put into social, i.e., "group" or "community" action, 'changing' the way you, and when they participate, your children, spouse, relatives, neighbors, educators, employer, fellow workers, police and police chief, sheriff, representatives, judges, mayor, governor, president, and even minister feels, thinks, and acts toward authority and relates with others—with "in and for 'Self,'" i.e., "What can I get out of this for me?" "'Self' esteem," i.e., "group affirmation," i.e., "the pride of life" 'justifying' your negation of humbling, denying, controlling, and disciplining your "Self" (under authority), letting "Self" direct ("enlighten," "illuminate") your paths instead. "Take heed therefore that the light which is in thee be not darkness." Luke 11:35

While "intellectuals," i.e., the "enlightened," i.e., the "illuminated" laud dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., man 'justifying' his sinful nature so that he can sin with impunity (deceiving himself and those who listen to him into believing that it is just "academics," worshiping those who have advanced dialectic 'reasoning, i.e., promoted "Self" 'justification' down through the ages), none dare expose it for what is, "an abomination in the sight of God." Luke 16:15
    God did not create evil. He is good and created that which is good. When we 'justify' our "Self" over and therefore against His will, i.e., when we think dialectically, i.e., according to our flesh and the world, according to our heart's desire of the 'moment', i.e., deceiving ourselves, believing that our wicked heart is "good," and act accordingly, i.e., disobey Him, we create evil, calling it "good." Being holy, pure, and righteous (in and of Himself), the Father is the same yesterday, today, and forever, i.e., unchanging (with "no shadow of turning"), the same is true of His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ—who, though being equal with God, yet being sent by the Father, humbling himself and taking on the form of a man, i.e., being born of the Spirit and the flesh, was obedient to His Heavenly Father in all things commanded, but we, being born of the flesh (sensuous), with life's situations affecting our "feelings" of the 'moment,' are ever subject to 'change,' i.e., are born into sin. Dialectic 'reasoning' establishes ('justifies') "human nature," i.e., the lust of the flesh and eyes, and the pride of life ("self-'justification'"), i.e., our sinful nature over and therefore against the Father's authority, turning "good" (the Father's authority) into "evil" and "evil" (our carnal nature, i.e., that which is of the world) into "good." Rejecting the preaching and teaching of the truth, i.e., the Word of God, accepting it as is, by faith and obeying without question, we, according to our carnal inclination (carnal desires) turn to dialoguedialoguing our opinion, i.e., how we are "feeling" in the 'moment,' in the "light" of the current situation, with ourselves and with others—in order to do and/or get what we want, perceiving it as being "good" (when we get our way).
    We are all born into this world with our carnal nature—approaching pleasure and avoiding pain, i.e., desiring pleasure and resenting restraint. It is our parent's authority system (their restraint, i.e., their rewarding and chastening of us for our actions) that introduces us to doing right—having to obey their commands, rules, facts, and truth (by faith), and not doing wrongwrong being our disobeying their commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., doing what we want to do when we want to do it, i.e., "'living' in the 'moment'," i.e., being "of and for ourselves" instead. According to dialectic 'reasoning,' we can not be our "Self," i.e., as we were before our parent's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into our lives, restraining us, preventing us from being ourselves, i.e., carnal (of the world only) until we learn to "accept" ('justify') our carnal nature again, i.e., regard it as being "normal," perceiving their commands, rules, facts, and truth as being "irrational" ("out of touch with the times") and therefore their authority system as being "irrelevant" ("out of date") in a world of "rapid 'change.'" Instead of our parent's "top-down" authority system being the structure of society, with us being personally held accountable to a "higher authority," i.e., to our parents, to our teacher, to our boss, , , to the Lord God for our thoughts and actions (engendering individualism, under God and a guilty conscience for doing wrong), those possessed with dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., perceiving us as being "equal " in nature, i.e., carnal (as "blank tablets," coming into this world neither evil nor good, recognizing only our affections, needing proper conditioning in order to become "good," instead of our sinful nature, i.e., our disposition or propensity to love the pleasures of the world over and therefore against any authority which restrains us), are intent in 'liberating' us, our children, etc., i.e., all of mankind from the father's/Father's authority (and restraint), thereby engendering anarchy and socialism (unrighteousness and abomination) in the name of "worldly peace and socialist harmony," placing themselves, as facilitator's of 'change,' psychotherapist's, Transformational Marxist's (all three being the same), in authority instead, replacing the Father of mercy and grace with "children of disobedience," i.e., children of hate and violence—when they do not or can not get their way. With pleasure becoming the 'drive' of life and the augmentation of pleasure its 'purpose' (instead of doing right and not wrong), killing anyone (be it the unborn, the elderly, the innocent, the helpless, or the righteous) who gets in the way (of pleasure, i.e., progress) becomes the way of "life." God's mercy and grace does not 'justify' sin, with God looking the other way, it is His forgiving us when we repent, trusting in Him with all our heart, turning from our wicked ways.

Replacing the preaching of commands and rules, the teaching of facts and truth to be accepted as is, by faith (and obeyed "or else"), and the discussing of things misunderstood or done wrong (at the discretion of the one in authority), i.e., replacing the "top-down" (hierarch) pattern or system of the "old world order" (with children knowing right from wrong because they have been told) with the dialoguing of opinions with one another ('discovering' what we all have in common, i.e. what we all do privately within our "Self," talking to our "Self" about our desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment,' i.e., about how the world "is"—with parents restraining us, preventing us from being ourselves, and how it "ought" to be—tolerant of our carnal/natural desires, 'justifying' our resentment toward restraint and our dissatisfaction with authority, sharing with others how we are "feeling" and what we are "thinking" in the 'moment') to a consensus (to a "feeling" of "oneness"), i.e., initiating and sustaining the pattern or system of the so called "new world order," we become subject to "the group," i.e., to the society of impulses and urges instead. No longer having to hold our "Self" accountable to our parents, , , the Lord God (practicing "self" control, "self" discipline, "self" restraint, humbling and denying our "self" in order to do right and not wrong, i.e., doing that which is lacking in society today) we become, through dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., through "Self 'justification,'" i.e., through "esteeming" our "Self," 'liberated' from Godly restraint, no longer having a "guilty conscience" for doing wrong, engendering, i.e., 'justifying' a culture of unrighteousness and abomination, sinning with impunity instead. We discuss what we know, i.e., what we have been told, i.e., what we have been taught or have learned in the past. We dialogue our opinion, i.e., how we "feel" in the 'moment.' By evaluating God's Word, the world, and our "Self" from our 'reasoning' (according to our opinion, i.e., according to our feelings, thoughts, and actions of the 'moment,' i.e., according to our desires and dissatisfactions), instead of evaluating our 'reasoning,' i.e., our "Self" and the world from God's Word (according to truth, requiring faith), we turn God into the image of man, 'liberating' man from Godly restraint, i.e., 'liberating' him from knowing the truth, turning our children over to those who are "of and for their 'Self'" only, with God letting us and our children have their way (untill judgment day). "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children." Hosea 4:6 In other words, because we have refused to "trust in the Lord with all our heart," "acknowledging Him in all our ways," he will remove his hand of protection over our children, turning them over to the world, which knows no mercy or grace.
    Dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "Self 'justification'" 'liberates' our personal "feelings" of the 'moment' from the restraints of the "past," i.e., from the knowledge which we learned from our father/Father—which prevents (inhibits or blocks) 'change'—making us subject (reactive) to the situation, i.e., to the "crisis" of the 'moment' instead. It is what mental and social health (the so called "Health Care Package") is all about. The distance between you (your feelings, thoughts, and actions of the 'moment,' including your relationship with others) and the father's/Father's authority system (doing right and not wrong, i.e., 'judgmentalism,' i.e., "prejudiced" to facts and not the "feelings" of the 'moment') determines where along the spectrum of mental and social health you (and your children) reside in any given 'moment.' The closer you, i.e., your feelings, thoughts, and actions and the father's/Father's authority system, i.e., the standards of the "past" are, the "less healthy" you are. The farther they are apart (in other words: the closer your "feelings," thoughts, and actions of the 'moment' are—desire/augmenting pleasure, i.e., desiring "group approval," i.e., augmenting community-socialism, and resenting/attenuating restraint, i.e., resenting and working to over come [negate] the father's/Father's authority system—in the 'light' of the and through the current situation), the "more healthy" you are. In a "globalist minded society," i.e., in a democratic, bipartisan, tolerant of deviancy environment, the individual (under God) becomes of little or of no worth or value unless he is willing to "repent" ('compromise') and serve and protect the collective, i.e., "the people," i.e., at least tolerating (if not participating in) the depravity of man. If you are silent in the midst of unrighteousness, refusing to reprove, correct, or rebuke unrighteousness, because you desire the approval of men, i.e., approval or affirmation of "the group," unrighteousness becomes the "norm," i.e., "abomination" becomes the law of the land.
    Diaprax is man's praxis or social action of using dialectic 'reasoning, i.e., Genesis 3:1-6—the dialectic process, i.e., "Self 'justification,'" i.e., aufheben, i.e., "enlightenment," i.e., evaluating himself, the world, and God's Word according to his carnal desires of the 'moment,' revealing ('liberating') his resentment toward restraint, negating the father's/Father's authority system, i.e., negating Hebrews 12:5-11 in order to negate the guilty conscience for doing wrong (for sinning), i.e., in order to negate Romans 7:14-25. By negating (denying) the deceitfulness and wickedness of his heart and God's judgment upon him for his sins, the need for a savior (faith in the Son of God and obedience to His Heavenly Father) is negated in man's feelings, thoughts, and actions, i.e. in the relationship he has with himself and the world. Despite all the "academics," this is what the dialectic process has always been about—man, through dialoguing his opinion with himself and with others, 'justifying' himself, i.e., 'justifying' his carnal desires of the 'moment' in defiance to authority. No matter what 'liberals' might say (in denial), Socrates was, and they (and anyone else who 'reasons' dialectically) are guilty of two things, corrupting the morals of the youth and destroying their respect for (toward) authority. The same is true for all who praxis philosophy, sociology, and psychology. Their objective is not to attack religion or authority outright (keeping authority in place), but rather to 'change' the way children think. Their dialectic 'logic' being: "help" children 'justify' "human nature," i.e., 'justify' their carnal desires of the 'moment' and their resentment toward authority, and faith in God will "wither away." The objective of dialectic 'reasoning' is never to let a crisis (personal and/or social) go to waste—using it to "bring people together" (to "build community") based upon their "feelings" of the 'moment' (sensuousness), i.e., based upon being concerned about pleasure and sight, i.e., 'living' in the 'moment,' instead of being concerned about where they will spend eternity (individual accountability before God) based upon doing right and not wrong (righteousness), i.e., faith and obedience.

By focusing upon the child's "feelings" of the 'moment,' by making the child's nature the ground of being, his desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' (his desire or "lust" for the pleasures of the 'moment' and his dissatisfaction toward restraint and the restrainer), i.e., the child's opinion of the world (thinking about how the world "is"—under parental and/or Godly restraint, and how it "ought" to be—tolerant of his carnal desires of the 'moment,' i.e., philosophy, i.e., man's opinion) supersedes the authority of the parent and God, making their commands, rules, facts, and truth "irrational" (impractical) and therefore their authority "irreverent" (of the past), thereby negating the "guilty conscience" in the child (the father's voice, i.e., his commands, rules, facts, and truth in the child) for doing wrong, i.e., for sinning, allowing the child to sin with impunity, allowing him to think and act (called theory and practice) according to his perception of the "new" world order that he has created out of his own imagination, a "new" world order subject to his carnal nature, "of and for 'Self"' only over and therefore against the "old" world order which is subject to the father's/Father's authority, i.e., subject to his preaching and teaching of commands, rules, facts, and truth to be accepted and obeyed as given (by faith), teaching his children to humble, deny, control, and discipline themselves in order to do right and not wrong, despite their missing out on the pleasures of the 'moment' and having to endure pain, including the pain of missing out on the pleasures of the 'moment' ("repression") and the rejection of men ("alienation"), for judging them, i.e., for making them "feel" bad, i.e., "feel guilty" for doing wrong, i.e., for sinning, i.e., for being "normal," i.e., for being "human," i.e., for being children ("children of disobedience") in adult bodies, i.e., for being "of and for their 'Self'" and the world only.

When the children rule, the people are oppressed.

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine [Godly restraint]; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers [facilitators of 'change,' i.e., psychotherapists], having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables [unto their own imaginations]." 2 Timothy 4:3, 4

"Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." Romans 1:21-32

"... and children shall rise up against their parents, and shall cause them to be put to death." Mark 13:12

© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 1997-2016