"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
When children ("lusting" after the pleasures of the 'moment' ) negate the Father's authority in their thoughts and actions, they bring upon themselves the Father's wrath in the end.
The ideology of George Hegel, Karl Marx, and Sigmund Freud, i.e. the dialectic process directly affects your life. The dialectic process is all about 'creating' "unity and peace" ("worldly unity and socialist peace" ) and "human relationship" ("humanist relationship"), i.e. a "new" world order of "equality"—common-ism, i.e. "Can't we all just get along," "I'm OK, You're OK," dialoguing of opinions to a consensus way of feeling, thinking, acting, and relating known as a Heresiarchal Paradigm of 'change'—by 'liberating' the child's thoughts and action (commonly referred to as "theory and practice") from the affects of the father's/Father's "above-below," "top-down," "right-wrong"—"do right and not wrong according to my standards 'or else,'" preaching and teaching, "prejudiced," "judgmental"—authority structure (the "old" world order way of feeling, thinking, acting, and relating known as a Patriarchal Paradigm, i.e. where the father/Father, i.e. both the earthly father and the Heavenly Father, 1-give commands and rules to be obeyed and facts and truth to be accepted as is, by faith, 2-bless those children who obey, or get it right, 3-chasten those children who do not obey, or get it "wrong," and 4-cast out those children who reject 1, 2, and 3, i.e. who question the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth and challenge his/His authority, i.e. who, because of their rebellious behavior, the father cuts off from emotional and financial support, refusing to support their carnal ways (living by sight, i.e. determining right and wrong according to sensuousness, i.e. "lusting" after the pleasures of the 'moment,' thinking and acting according to their "self interests"), that they might repent, casting them out of the family to protect the family from their rebellious/revolutionary praxis. When the child is 'liberated' (is "helped," by the facilitator of 'change,' to 'liberate' himself, i.e. his "self-interest") from the father's/Father's authority structure (system, paradigm, i.e. way of feeling, thinking, acting, and relating), i.e. from his/His "above-below," "top-down," "right-wrong" way of feeling, thinking, acting, and relating), the child's "guilty conscience" (for disobeying) is negated, allowing him to participate in the social action (praxis) of negating the father's/Father's authority not only in himself but also in his relationship with the "the group," i.e. the "community," i.e. "society," uniting with them in negating (neutralizing, margining, and "removing," or "looking the other way," i.e. being silent for the sake of "self-interest" while they are "removing") the father and his authority structure (along with all those who honour and obey the father/Father and follow his way of feeling, thinking, acting, and relating), without having a "guilty conscience" while doing so. All this is done to 'encourage' the children (the future society) to be themselves, i.e. as they were before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, and truth and threat of punishment/condemnation for disobedience, i.e. carnal, i.e. subject to their (and others) feelings, thoughts, and actions of the 'moment,' i.e. responding to the current situation according to "human nature," i.e. approaching pleasure and avoiding pain (loving pleasure and hating restraint, i.e. hating the restrainer, i.e. hating the father's/Father's authority, known as a Heresiarchal Paradigm of 'change'), i.e. relating to "all that is of the world" instead (Only). "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
If you build "relationship upon 'self interest'" it is imperative that you negate the father's/Father's authority (Godly restraint) which inhibits or blocks it, i.e. when you build society upon the love of pleasure ("self interest," i.e. "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life") you 'create' a society which hates the father's/Father's authority which inhibits or blocks it. You can not have the one (love of the pleasures of the 'moment') without the other (hate of the father's/Father's authority which restrains it). "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
The "new" world order (the dialectic process, i.e. the "group grade") is all about changing how the child feels, thinks, and acts toward the father's/Father's authority (parental authority—which engenders individualism, parochialism, i.e. local control-Nationalism, i.e. in the form of a 'limited,' 'representative,' 'majority vote,' 'constitutional,' 'republic' form of government, to prevent government from encroaching upon the father's authority over his home, property, and business, under God). Dialectic 'reasoning,' the 'reasoning' of the "new" world order 'encourages' the child to feel, think, and act in relation to himself, others, and the world according to his own "human nature," i.e. according to his impulses, urges, and "felt" needs ("self-interests") of the 'moment', so that he (along with all the children of the world) can be himself (themselves), i.e. of the world Only, negating the Father's authority in his (their) feelings, thoughts, and actions, affecting all institutions of life, including the home and the "church" in the process. To prevent "maladjustment" (going off in rebellion, only serving his own interests) or returning to his father's/Father's authority only now on a Nationalistic scale (equated to Fascism) his 'liberation' is not done in isolation but is done in "the group setting," with the facilitator of 'change' making sure his reattachment (from the father's/Father's authority system, i.e. local and/or National control) is to society and its causes (socialism, globalism, environmentalism, in the form of democratization, conscietization, synergism, etc.).
Instead of the child learning self-restraint and self-control, i.e. humbling and denying himself (his-"self") at the father's/Father's hands, dialectic 'reasoning' engenders "self-esteem" in the child. Dialectic 'reasoning' 'liberates' ('justifies'), in the mind of the child, his "self-interest" (thinking about his "self," i.e. what he can get out of the situation for his "self," depending upon the approval, i.e. validation of "the group" to get it) from the father's/Father's authority (individualism under the father/Father, i.e. under God) so that he can find his identity within his "self," i.e. within his carnal nature and society (the carnal nature of "the group"), building "relationship" upon "human nature" and the common-ist "interest" of "the group" (the "community"), i.e. augmenting pleasure and attenuation pain, i.e. that which is of the world Only. Instead of the child suspending his carnal desires of the 'moment,' in order to fulfill his father's/Father's will (the "old" world order), he "suspends" his father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, in order to fulfill his (and allow others to fulfill their) carnal desires of the 'moment' (the "new" world order), i.e. 'actualizing' his and their "self interests," i.e. known as "self-actualization."
There is "I," "me," and "myself" and "you" and "yourself." While you can talking to me, you can not directly talk to (dialogue with) my "self." Only I can talk to (dialogue with) my "self" (about my desires of the 'moment' and my dissatisfaction with the father's/Father's authority, i.e. his/His "Can not," "Thou shalt not," "Because I said so," "It is written ...," etc., i.e. which restrains me—both conditions encapsulated in the word "ought," as in "Well, I 'ought' to be able to ...," i.e. you voicing your opinion internally to your "self" in response to the father's/Father's "Can not," "Thou shalt not," "Because I said so," "It is written ...," etc., i.e. I/you can not have an "ought" without a "can not" and I/you can not have a "can not" with an "ought"). And while I can talk to you, I can not directly talk to (dialogue with) your "self." Only you can talk to (dialogue with) your "self" (about your desires of the 'moment' and your dissatisfaction with the father's/Father's authority, i.e. his/His "Can not," "Thou shalt not," "Because I said so," "It is written ...," etc., which restrains you—encapsulated in the word "ought," as in "Well, I 'ought' to be able to ...," etc.). Only through the dialoguing of our opinions (sharing our 'ought's' with one another, i.e. you and I openly sharing with, i.e. dialoguing with one another what we are talking to, i.e. dialoguing with our "self" about) is it possible for me to know your "self" and you to know my "self," i.e. our "self interest." What we have in common in the dialoguing of our opinions (our sharing with one another regarding what we are talking to our "self" about, i.e. how we are "feeling" and what we are "thinking" in the 'moment') is our desires (love, pleasures, enjoyments, "lusts," "self-interests") of the carnal 'moment' and our dissatisfaction toward (hate of) the father's/Father's authority which prevents us from enjoying its pleasures. "Self" loves pleasure, i.e. "all that is of the world," and hates anything or anyone who stands in the way of it, preventing pleasure from having its way.
Being labeled as being "in denial" is simply another way of saying you are denying your "self" (your carnal desires) in favor of the father's/Father's authority. As Carl Rogers explained the 'change' process, i.e. the dialectic process: "Prior to therapy [before the child learns to evaluate his "self" in the "light" of his own "human nature" and the world, i.e. through the eyes of the "group" learning to "esteem" his "self"] the person [the child] is prone to ask himself 'What would my parents want me to do ?' [evaluating his "self" in the light of the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e. learning to discipline, control, deny, humble his "self"] During the process of therapy [during the "group grade" experience] the individual [the child] comes to ask himself 'What does it mean to me ["How do I 'feel' about it?" and "What do I 'think' about it?" i.e. learning to validate his "self," i.e. his "feelings" and "thoughts" of the 'moment,' i.e. his "opinion" in the "light" of the current situation over and against the father's/Father's authority]?'" (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy) "The ideas of the Enlightenment taught man that he could trust his own reason as a guide to establishing valid ethical norms and that he could rely on himself, needing neither revelation [the father/Father telling him how to live his life, i.e. "It is written ...," "My Father says ..."] nor that authority of the church [His obedient Son leading the way] in order to know good and evil." (Stephen Eric Bronner, Of Critical Theory and its Theorists—Critical Theory means "to liberate human beings [to 'liberate' the child] from the circumstances that enslave them [from the father's/Father's authority]." Max Horkheimer, i.e. Jürgen Habermas explains CT in Knowledge and Human Interests; where "emergence" is not only the child but all of mankind 'liberating' himself from the father's/Father's condition of "domination," i.e. feeling, thinking, and acting according to his/His established rules, commands, facts, and truth instead of feeling, thinking, and acting according to everyone's "felt" needs of the 'moment,' with man placing his hope in pleasure, i.e. Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, instead of in the Lord, i.e. the hope of glory, with man no longer establishing commands, rules, facts, and truth which restrains his "self" but instead making rules, commands, facts, and truth always subject to the "light" of the 'moment,' i.e. always being "adaptable to 'change,'" "tolerant of deviancy," i.e. ever 'changing') The scriptures warn us: "Take heed therefore that the light which is in thee be not darkness." Luke 11:35 where man depends upon his "human reasoning" (dialoguing his opinion not only with his "self" but with others of like opinion, feeling, thinking, and acting according to his and their "self interest") to 'justify' "human nature" over and against the father's/Father's authority: "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." 2 Timothy 3:7 "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 The truth is not established in man's (the child's) carnal nature, but in the Lord himself, subject to the Father's authority. "For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father who sent me, he gave me commandment what I should say, and what I should speak." John 12:49 "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
This is the heart and soul of the so called "new" world order, 'liberating' the child's "self" from the father's/Father's authority so that all children can come to know them "self" as they are, i.e. carnal, i.e. of the world Only (loving the pleasures of the world, hating the father's/Father's authority because it prevents, i.e. blocks them from becoming at-one-with, i.e. enjoying the pleasures of the 'moment'). The Objective of using dialectic 'reasoning' ("human 'reasoning'") to 'liberate' the child's "self" (and the facilitator of 'change') from the father's/Father's authority is to "help" all children come to know themselves as "one," i.e. as "team players," working together as "one" in the praxis (social action) of negating the father's/Father's authority, 'creating' a "new" world order based upon the nature of the child, i.e. "human relationship" Only, i.e. augmenting pleasure and attenuating pain, i.e. negating the father's/Father's authority (in its many applications, i.e. in the workplace, in the classroom, etc.) which comes between the child (the worker, the student, etc.) and the pleasures, enjoyments, "lusts" (Eros), of the 'moment,' with the child (the worker, the student) 'justifying' ("serving" and "protecting") unrighteousness and abomination ("human nature") in the process. "And he said unto them, 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 "..., If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him." 1 John 2:15
A brief overview and chart might be helpful as you read the article Diaprax Exposed, explaining dialectic 'reasoning' and its use in "team building" (praxis) to 'create' a so called "'New' World Order" (using a method for 'change' as "new" as Genesis 3:1-6). The dialectic process not only affects you, it affects those who you love as well, negating the father's/Father's authority (Hebrews 12:5-11) in their thoughts and actions, i.e. negating faith in God, putting trust in man instead, i.e. using "human' reasoning'" (dialectic 'reasoning') to 'justify' "human nature," i.e. to 'justify' man's carnal desires, making him subject to the laws of the flesh over and against the father's/Father's authority, i.e. the law of God (Romans 7:14-25—which reveals man's need for salvation from condemnation and eternal death) engendering unrighteousness and abomination instead. It is why we are witnessing such rapid 'change,' i.e. disregard for parental (the father's) authority and an advancement of unrighteousness and abomination in this nation and around the world today. "Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD." " Blessed is the man that trusteth in the LORD, and whose hope the LORD is." Jeremiah 17:5, 7 "It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man." Psalms 118:8
Diaprax Exposed explains how the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus (dialectic 'reasoning') negates the Heavenly Father's authority, i.e. negates Godly restraint in the thoughts and actions of men (with men no longer willing to set aside their desires of the 'moment' in order to do the Father's will) by negating the earthly father's authority, i.e. negating the "guilty conscience," i.e. the voice of the father in the child, restraining the child's thoughts and actions (with the child no longer willing to set aside his desires of the 'moment' in order to do his father's will), paving the way for 'change,' i.e. where order is no longer based upon the father's/Father's "top-down" authority but in the child initiating and sustaining "equality" with other children, i.e. thinking and acting according to his/their carnal nature, i.e. basing 'reality' upon the deceitfulness and wickedness of their heart ("human nature") instead. "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9
It is the 'purpose' of Common Core, with its use of "Bloom's (Marzano's, Webb's*) Taxonomies" in the classroom, i.e. the use of dialectic 'reasoning' (the dialoguing of opinions, concerning "self-interest" and the father's/Father's authority which restrains it, i.e. 'liberating' "self interest" by negating the father's/Father's authority), to turn the classroom into a "Training Laboratory," 'changing' how the children feel about, what they think about, and how they act toward parental authority, i.e. turning their hearts away from the father's authority ('liberating' them, in their thoughts and actions, from the father's restraint), negating the "guilty conscience" for disobedience, i.e. for doing wrong (for turning away from or against "tradition"), thereby, according to dialectic 'reasoning,' turning man's heart away from the Father's authority ('liberating' man, in his feelings, thoughts and actions, from Godly restraint), negating the "guilty conscience" for disobedience, i.e. for sinning. Dialectic 'reasoning' redefines "sin" as man creating and sustaining any condition which "represses" him, i.e. which turns him against his own nature, and "alienates" him from others, i.e. turning him against the world (and the world against him)—"sin" is therefore the father's/Father's authority, with his commands, rules, facts, and truth holding his children accountable to belief, "prejudicing" them against their own nature and the nature of the world, i.e. "repressing" them, "alienating" them from the other children of the "community." Repentance is no longer man turning from his wicked (carnal) ways to doing the Father's will, i.e.asking the Father to forgive him for his wicked ways, but turning to his wicked (carnal) ways, asking others to forgive him for getting in their wicked (carnal) ways, i.e. repenting before them for trying to get them to do the Father's will.
*Norman L. Webb's Depth Of Knowledge-DOK "Taxonomy," building upon Bloom's/Marzano's "Taxonomy," is based upon knowing how "deep" the child's "knowledge" (skill) is in seducing, deceiving, and manipulating others, i.e. as a "scientist," using Higher Order Thinking Skills-HOTS to 'change' their ethics from obedience to the father's/Father's authority, i.e. refusing to 'compromise' to "get along" with others, to the ethics of the 'changing' times, i.e. 'compromising' to "get along" with others, knowing how to get them to 'compromise' as well, transforming their way of thinking and acting so that they can be "adaptable to 'change'" in the present and the future 'changing' society. The "Taxonomies" evaluate the child's, i.e. the "groups," i.e. society's 'change' from "fixity" to "adaptability" using Kurt Lewin's Force Field Analysis, i.e. Obama's "Power Analysis," evaluating the degree of 'change' (along a spectrum or continuum), the child, i.e. the "group," i.e. society has made and the type and amount of seduction, deception, and manipulation that is necessary to move him/them/it further down the pathway of 'change.' "Individuals move not from a fixity through change to a new fixity, though such a process is indeed possible. But [through a] continuum from fixity [from the the child honoring the father's/Father's authority, obeying his/His commands and rules] to changingness [to the child following after his own carnal urges and impulses, responding to the carnal situation], from rigid structure to flow, from stasis to process." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy) "A natural step in the present study, therefore, was to conceive of a continuum extending from extreme conservatism [the children honoring the father's/Father's authority] to extreme liberalism [the children, united as one, negating the father's/Father's authority] and to construct a scale which would place individuals along this continuum." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) It is what the "group grade" in the classroom is all about, evaluating the child's emotional, mental, and physical ability to 'change,' i.e. his 'willingness' to 'compromise' for the sake of unity, i.e. for the sake of initiating and sustaining "the group," i.e. for the sake of initiating and sustaining "community," i.e. for the sake of initiating and sustaining society.
"If an individual wishes to maintain a position of arbitrary authority [if the father/Father wishes to maintain his/His position of authority], then it behooves him to inhibit the development of any rules permitting reciprocal process observation and commentary [the father/Father must prevent the child from having the "right" to openly evaluate, i.e. dialogue his opinion regarding the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth and behavior with other children, i.e. questioning the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, resulting in challenging his/His authority in the end]." (Irvin Yalom, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy) If the father dialogues his opinion with his children, i.e. to restore his children to his authority, he abdicates his authority to his children's opinions instead. Maintaining authority entails discussion, i.e. not setting aside one's position while attempting to persuade others of its importance. The dialectic method is man "rationally" dialoguing his opinion with his "self" and with other men, 'justifying' to his "self" and to others his disobedience against God (rejecting God's authority over his life), i.e. the child "rationally" dialoguing his opinion with his "self" and with other children, 'justifying' to his "self" and to others his disobedience against the father (rejecting the father's authority over his life), finding identity in his "self" and the children of like feelings, thoughts, and actions instead.
The dialectic process is known for its "thesis," "antithesis," and "synthesis" cycle of 'change.' If you start with the father's authority, making the father's authority the "thesis," then the child's nature, i.e. his natural inclination to become at-one-with the world in pleasure, in the 'moment' (at odds with the father's authority) becomes the "antithesis." With the father's authority to chasten the child, i.e. to restrain him from following after his natural inclination to become at-one-with the world in pleasure, in the 'moment,' and to cast-out the child who questions his commands, rules, facts, and truth and challenges his authority, "synthesis" is averted and (as György Lukács put it) the "dialectic method" is "overthrown," preventing 'change.' But if you start with the child's nature, making the child's desire to become at-one-with the world in pleasure, in the 'moment,' the "thesis," then the father's authority, restraining the child's nature, becomes the "antithesis." Lukács wrote: "For to accept that solution [evaluating everything through the child's eyes, i.e. according to his feelings and thoughts of the 'moment'], even in theory, would be tantamount to observing society from a class standpoint [observing the world from the child's perspective] other than that of the bourgeoisie [the "top-down," "I'm above, You're below," "Mine. Not yours." "I can, You can not," "I am right, You are wrong" way of thinking and acting]. And no class can do that-unless it is willing to abdicate its power freely [which would effectively negate the father's office of authority]." "... as soon as the bourgeoisie [the father (and those who support his way of thinking and acting)] is forced to take up its stand on this terrain [considering the child's "feelings" and "thoughts" in deciding actions to be taken, i.e. creating "equality" through the dialoguing of opinions, i.e. participating in the consensus process], it is lost." (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness What is Orthodox Marxism?) With the help of the facilitator of 'change' (protecting the child from the father's authority so that he has a chance to "think" for himself, i.e. "rationally" 'justify," along with others, his "human nature" over and against the father's authority) the child is able to become at-one-with (achieve synthesis with) the world (with society) in pleasure, in the 'moment,' negating the father's authority in this "feeling," "thoughts," and "actions" in the process.
While the father/Father demands no 'compromise' (regarding his/His principles), "community" is initiated and sustained by 'compromise,' i.e. "tolerating deviance," i.e. putting aside principles, i.e. the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth ("for the 'moment'"), for the sake of unity, especially when dealing with a "community 'crisis'" (as well as national, international, and environmental 'crisis,' as every 'crisis' is used to promote and fund those programs and people who train both children and adults in dialectic 'reasoning,' negating the father's/Fathers authority, i.e. taking his funds away from him to support and advance dialectic 'reasoning' in the process). When you set aside principle (the father's/Father's authority), to "tolerate deviancy," i.e. when you are silent in the midst of unrighteousness, deviancy (unrighteousness) becomes the "norm." i.e. 'justifying,' in the feelings, thoughts, and actions of "the people," the silencing of principle/righteousness, i.e. negating the father's/Father's authority (and those who support it) for the sake of "community." As the first National Training Laboratory manual clearly stated the dialectic objective: "We must develop persons [children] who see non-influencability of private convictions [other children who hold faithfully to the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth] in joint deliberations [in the consensus process, i.e. in the "group grade"] as a vice rather than a virtue." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)
By placing the child in the "group grade" environment (with the teacher, i.e. the facilitator of 'change,' seducing, deceiving, and manipulating him into dialoguing his opinion, along with "the diverse group" of students, to a consensus) rather than in the traditional classroom environment (with the teacher up front inculcating, i.e. preaching and teaching commands, rules, facts, and truth to be learned and applied as is) his way of feeling, thinking and acting is 'changed.' "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) Kurt Lewin edited the Transformational Marxist's, i.e. the "Institute of Social Research" journal (Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung) while he and they were still in Germany, before coming to the states in 1933, i.e. due to Hitler becoming Chancellery of Germany then). Lewin stated, regarding education in America: A "hierarchy of leaders has to be trained which reach out into all essential sub-parts of the group." "Hitler himself has obviously followed very carefully such a procedure." "The democratic procedure will have to be as thorough and as solidly based on group organization." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change) Abraham Maslow, following along the same line of 'reasoning' as Lewin, wrote: "For Marx, man's [the child's] being & consciousness are determined by the structure of his society [the classroom environment]." "Marxian theory ["the group"] needs Freudian-type instinct theory [therapy] to round it out. And of course, vice versa." "The whole discussion becomes species-wide, One World, at least so far as the guiding goal is concerned. To get to that goal is politics & is in time and space & will take a long time & cost much blood." "This is a realistic combination of the Marxian version & the humanistic. (Better add to definition of "humanistic" that it also means one species, One World.)" "The new Zeitgeist is value-full (value-directed, value-vectorial), human-need & metaneed centered (or based), moving toward basic-need gratification & metaneed metagratification--that is, toward full-humanness, SA, psychological health, full-functioning human fulfillment, i.e., toward human perfection as the limit & as the direction." "Yet nakedness is absolutely right. So is the attack on antieroticism, the Christian & Jewish foundations. Must move in the direction of the Reichian orgasm." "I must put as much of this as is possible & usable in my education book, & more & more in succeeding writings." (Abraham Maslow, The Journals of A.H. Maslow) "Self-actualizing people have to a large extent transcended the values of their culture [the father's/Father's authority equated, dialectically to Nationalism]. They are not so much merely Americans as they are world citizens, members of the human species first and foremost." (Abraham Maslow, The Further Reaches of Human Nature)
The famous Marxists (Transformational Marxist, i.e. those who merge Marx with Freud or visa versa) György Lukács (founder of the "Institute of Social Research") defined the dialectic method by defining its nemesis: "The dialectical method was overthrown [by the children honoring the father's/Father's authority, i.e. obeying the father's/Father's commands and rules, accepting his facts and truth as given, by faith]―the parts [the children] were prevented from finding their definition within the whole [within themselves, i.e. within "the group," i.e. within the "community," i.e. within "society"]." (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism?) Karl Marx explained it this way: "The essence of man is not an abstraction inherent in each particular individual [man made in the image of God (to evaluate himself, i.e. his "self" and the world from His standards) as the child is made in the image of the father (to evaluate himself, i.e. his "self" and the world from his standards)]." "The real nature of man is the totality of social relations ['discovering' common-ism, i.e. "self interest" within the "community"]." (Karl Marx, Thesis on Feuerbach # 6) "It is not individualism [the child being personally accountable to the father for his actions as a man is personally accountable to God for this thoughts and actions] that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society [man's carnal nature, i.e. "human nature" (that which all men have in common)] is the necessary framework through which freedom and individuality are made realities." (Karl Marx in John Lewis, The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx) "Only within a social context [only within the ever 'changing,' i.e. diverse, i.e. deviant nature of "the group," with everyone 'compromising' ("tolerating deviancy") for the sake of initiating and sustaining "community," common-unity] individual man is able to realize his own potential as a rational being ['justifying' his "self" as he 'justifies' other's "self," 'liberating' his "self" and other's "self" from the father's/Father's authority in the process]." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right) "The more of himself man attributes to God [being made in the image of God, subject to righteousness], the less he has left in himself [being made in the image of carnal man, subject to sensuousness]." (Karl Marx, Selected Reading in Sociology and Social Philosophy) "The life which he [the child] has given to the object [to the father/Father, i.e. by the child recognizing and honoring the father's/Father's authority, i.e. obeying the father/Father, i.e. doing his/His will instead of satisfying his own carnal desires of the 'moment,' he not only "represses" that which is of nature only, according to dialectic 'reasoning,' he "creates" the father's/Father's "above-below," "top-down," "right-wrong" authority structure (the "old" world order) which then] sets itself against him as an alien and hostile force." (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3) In this way of thinking, instead of the child being a child of the father/Father, i.e. an individual, under God, he becomes a child of the world, i.e. a socialist, subject to "the group," i.e. to the "community," i.e. to society, subject to the facilitators of 'change,' i.e. to socialists-globalists-environmentalists (common-ists), i.e. to those who "helped" 'liberate' him from the father's/Father's authority so that he could become himself again (as he was before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth and threat of punishment/condemnation for disobeying), i.e. so that he could become at-one-with the world, subject to the process of 'change' itself, i.e. subject to "human nature" (and those who seduce, deceive, and manipulate him through it) Only.
When man, as a child, uses dialectic 'reasoning' ('self-justification') to 'liberate' himself from the father's/Father's authority, i.e. thinking (perceiving) that he is in control of the world, he does not realize that it is the facilitator of 'change,' i.e. who seduces, deceives, and manipulates him with the world, who is in control of him instead. Rejecting "right-wrong" thinking and acting, i.e. the father's/Father's authority as a way of thinking and acting, refusing to repent of his way of thinking and acting before the father/Father and turning back to him/Him, the child is only left with "human nature," i.e. "the approaching of pleasure and the attenuating of pain," i.e. his "lusting" after the gratifying things of the world and his hatred toward the father/Father and his/His authority when he/He prevents him from having his way, and "human 'reasoning," i.e. dialectic 'reasoning,' 'justifying' his thoughts and actions, i.e. 'justifying' the thoughts and actions of his "friends" to silence the "guilty conscience," i.e. the voice of the father/Father within him. Rejecting the father's/Father's authority as the way of life, he (with the "help" of the facilitator of 'change') embraces "human 'reasoning'" 'justifying' "human nature" (dialectic 'reasoning') as the way of life instead, which leads love of self and the world (unrighteousness and abomination), hate of the father/Father and his/His authority, and destruction (unlike God, for man to 'create,' i.e. to innovate, i.e. to 'change,' he must destroy what is), murder (taking the life of the innocent, helpless, and 'resistors' of 'change,' when they get, or are perceived as getting in the way of "social progress," i.e. getting in the way of the carnal pleasures of the life of "the people") and death/eternal death. "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 "For they being ignorant of God's righteousness [thinking and acting according to the Father's will], and going about to establish their own righteousness [thinking and acting according to their own carnal desires, i.e. "felt" needs, i.e. pleasures, enjoyments, "lusts"], have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God." Romans 10:3 "There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 16:25
Dialectic 'reasoning' turns "My garden. Not your garden. Do what I say or else." (which engenders private property and private business, i.e. individualism, i.e. "My children. Not your children." "My property. Not your property." "My business. Not your business." under God), into "We working for us." turning the hearts of the children from the Father (obedience and righteousness) to all that is of the world (to disobedience and sensuousness), i.e. to unrighteousness and abomination instead. 1 John 2:15-18 The 'change' process is subtle and complex, surviving in our 'compromises,' i.e. in our "ought's" of the 'moment, i.e. in our carnal "thoughts" over and against the father's/Father's "Not's," where we least notice its affect upon us, gaining control over our heart and actions.
While earthly fathers are not perfect (righteous in and of themselves), some are downright tyrants, the office they serve in is perfect, under God. According to those of dialectic 'reasoning,' you must negate the earthly father's authority in the thoughts and actions of the children (including the "benevolent" father) if you want to negate the Heavenly Father's authority (religion) in the thoughts and actions of men, i.e. if you want to 'create' a "new" world order where the children, or rather, where facilitators of 'change,' who seduce, deceive, and manipulate the children, rule instead of the father, i.e. where facilitators of 'change' (socialist "engineers") rule over God's creation instead of God. Rousseau wrote (in defiance to God, hating the father's/Father's authority): "The first man who, having fenced in a piece of land, said 'This is mine,' and found people naive enough to believe him, that man was the true founder of civil society [where the citizens recognize and honor the father's authority (his right to rule) over his own children, business, and land, i.e. private property] ... the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody [instead of "the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof." (1 Corinthians 10:26) with God giving man (individual man) "dominion" over it, under Him (Genesis 2:26)]." (Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discourse on Inequality)
When "the people" reject the father's/Father's authority (actually his/His "above-below," "top-down," "right-wrong" way of thinking and acting), when they 'justify' to themselves that sinning (disobeying/compromising/"setting aside" the father's/Father's commands and rules, when they go against or block the desires, i.e. the impulse and urges of the 'moment') is the "norm," i.e. that man is of "human nature" only, they make righteousness, i.e. doing the father's/Father's will a non-issue, i.e. "moot." Norman Brown explained it this way, tying it to the "garden experience" (Genesis 3:1-6): "To experience Freud [psychology] is to partake a second time of the forbidden fruit." "But Brown [Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History] believed that the payoff was worth the price of sin—namely, that alienation [the children divided amongst themselves on the issue of right and wrong, i.e. "My father is right and your father is wrong"] would be overcome, and the return of the repressed [the children ('liberated' from the father's/Father's authority), united as one, i.e. upon "human nature" only] completed, rendering problems of sin [disobedience against the father's/Father's authority and having a "guilty conscience" for disobedience, i.e. for sinning] permanently moot." (Mike Connor). Brown's contemporary, Herbart Marcuse, quoting Sigmund Freud, put it more succinctly: "If the guilt accumulated in the civilized domination of man by man can ever be redeemed by freedom, then the ‘original sin' must be committed again: ‘We must again eat from the tree of knowledge in order to fall back into the state of innocence." (Sigmund Freud as quoted in Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: A philosophical inquiry into Freud) When "the people," as "children of disobedience," reject the father's/Father's authority, God lets them have their hearts desires, turning them over to their own demise: "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 It is where we find ourselves today.
While our framing father's rejected the father's authority over this nation (a king), as well as over the states, the counties, the townships, and the cities (dividing government into three branches, separated from one another, to prevent his reappearance), they, unlike the French Revolution, retained the father's authority in the home (recognizing his inalienable rights, establishing the bill of rights so that the father could protect his family, property, and business), thus guaranteeing a "guilty conscience" in the citizenry (engendered from the father's/Father's authority, i.e. the children's fear of judgment and punishment from by father for doing wrong). A representative, limited, majority vote (Constitutional Republic) form of government is based upon the father's/Father's authority. The representative is figuratively a child who is sent to the store (in the place of the father) to "re-present" the father (the constituents), i.e. his/their principles as he purchases the father's needs. The limited is the authority of the father, i.e. the authority of the constitution's to remove the child (the representative) from representing him when the child misappropriates the father's money (no longer "re-presenting" the father and his principles), spending it on himself, i.e. on his own interests or his "friends" interests instead. The majority vote, is so that the fathers (the citizens), who differ from (who disagree with) one another on principles, will safeguard the representative, limiting form of government, i.e. preventing those who they disagree with from forever ruling over their lives (enslaving them), i.e. encroaching upon and removing their right of private property and business. With the negation of the father's authority in the home, representative, limited, majority vote government is being replaced with a Directorate (of the French Revolution) form of government (and the Russian, Chinese, Cuban, etc. revolutions which followed), i.e. government run by "consensus." "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)
Government by consent (consensus, i.e. i.e. "with 'feelings,'" i.e. government lead by "feelings," i.e. determining right and wrong according to the situation, i.e. the 'crisis' of the 'moment') negates government by conviction (conscience, i.e. "with science," i.e. doing right and not wrong according to established facts and truth), with freedom of the conscience being replaced with freedom from the conscience, i.e. by freedom of the "super-ego" (which determines right and wrong according to the "feelings," i.e. "self interests", i.e. perception, i.e. opinions, i.e. theories, i.e. what "seems to be" right for the 'moment'). Through the use of the consensus process (bypassing/circumventing, i.e. usurping, i.e. negating the representative, limited, majority vote form of government), a government of children—"representatives" who no longer "re-present" the father's (singular/individual) principles but their own (plural/socialist) "self" interests instead—is now in place, placing itself over and against (usurping) the father's authority, using the father's money (property, business, and family) as well as his credit card for their own personal pleasures instead, putting him into debt, saying they are doing it "for the 'good' of the people"—creating laws to remove the father (along with those who support his way of thinking and acting) if and when he (or they) get in the way. This is why democracy (government run by children) always ends up in tyranny (despotism). George Washington warned us: "The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one [through the use of the consensus process], and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositories, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them." (George Washington, Farewell Speech)
For more on the subject of 'change,' i.e. the dialectic process, i.e. the 'liberation' of children from parental authority, i.e. from the father's/Father's authority (the 'liberating' of mankind from Godly restraint), i.e. the "new" world order, i.e. "Making the world safe for Democracy," read the article Higher Order Thinking Skills (still in draft form) and the issues The Key to 'Change' and The Dialectic Process. See the issue It's all about your Father and His authority. Period! for the briefest overview of all.
There is no father's/Father's authority and therefore no "guilty conscience" for being unrighteous and abominable in dialogue. You can not say "That is wrong" in dialogue (that would be preaching), you can only say "I don't feel like" or "I don't think that that is right." Through the dialoguing of opinions (how a person "feels" or what he is "thinking" in the 'moment,' i.e. subject to his "feelings" which are subject to the situation of the 'moment'), to a consensus, i.e. to a "feeling" of "oneness" with others on the same issue, not only is the father's/Father's authority negated, the "guilty conscience" (which is engendered by the father's/Father's authority) is negated as well. Therefore all 'willing' participants can do unconscionable things while not only negating the father and his authority but also negating those who recognize and honour his authority as well, i.e. purging society of "resistors of 'change,'" i.e. of those who refuse to be "team players," i.e. of those who insist upon remaining individuals, under God, who instead of compromising (for the 'good' of the "community"), insist upon doing things right according to the father's/Father's will. Through the praxis (social action) of dialoguing opinions to a consensus, "right-wrong" thinking and acting is replaced with "human-ist 'rights,'" i.e. "rights" determined according to (and therefore protective of) the child's carnal "lusts," "enjoyments," i.e. pleasures, i.e. desires, i.e. "'felt' needs" of the 'moment.' "I ought," i.e. dialoguing with oneself and/or with others one's opinion, negates "I must," i.e. preaching to oneself and/or to others the need to recognize the father's/Father's authority and obey him/Him. Hegel wrote: "When a man has finally reached the point where he does not think he knows it better than others, that is when he has become indifferent to what they have done badly and he is interested only in what they have done right, then peace and affirmation have come to him." (G. F. W. Hegel, in one of the casual notes preserved at Widener) Instead of the traditional response against the father's/Father's authority of "fight or flight," with fighting or fleeing keeping the father's/Father's authority in place as much as "submitting," dialectic 'reasoning' creates in the mind of the child the father's/Father's authority as being "irrational," resulting in the child treating it as being "irrelevant," with the child doing "his own thing" (civil disobedience) despite the father's/Father's response, 'changing' society in the process.
In this way crime can be used in the defense of (and advancement of) socialism, i.e. in the name of "community," i.e. initiation and sustaining 'change.' Since the father has what the facilitator's of 'change' want, i.e. money, land, children, etc. i.e. that which can finance or satisfy their carnal pleasures of the 'moment,' through their use of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. through "self-social 'justification" the father and his authority can be negated in the thoughts and actions of the children, with the facilitators of 'change' taking those things that they want (for their pleasures, i.e. to satisfy their "felt" needs of the 'moment'), in the name of the children, i.e. in the name of "community," with impunity (with no "guilty conscience"). The dialectic idea being: don't force children into doing what you want, seduce, deceive, and manipulate them into doing it, turning them against the father and his authority (for the pleasures of the 'moment') instead, thereby they will give their inheritance to the facilitators of 'change,' 'willingly' supporting and working for them (for the "good" of "the community"), neutralizing, marginalize, and removing those father's (and children) who resist. If society, i.e. "community" becomes the measure of all things, then anyone who can not (or refuses to) contribute to its growth (is perceived of as being or possibly being detrimental, i.e. a 'liability' to it's "health"), including the unborn, the very young, the old, and anyone in between, is expendable for the "good" of all.
Teachers are being fired ("right-sized") for knowing and sharing this information. Even "Christian" schools, colleges, and universities are censoring this website, labeling it as being "extremely offensive" material because they do not want the parents (as well as teachers) knowing how the methods being used in the classroom are 'changing' the children's feeling, thoughts, and actions toward parental authority. One of "Bloom's Taxonomies" states: "There are many stores of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." (Taxonomy of Educational Objective Book 2: Affective Domain) While teachers are trained in how to use these "Taxonomies" (Book 1 Cognitive Domain and Book 2 Affective Domain), many do not like them, sensing something is wrong with them, but continue to use them (fearful of losing their job if they resist), ignorant of their intended "Educational Objective." Teachers can not be "certified" and schools can not be "accredited" unless they use these "Taxonomies" (updated by Marzano) in the classroom. Saying "There is more 'right' in them than 'wrong'" is like engraving upon the demolition experts tombstone, "He was more right than wrong." The results are the same. Boom!
According to those of dialectic 'reasoning,' negating the father's authority over the children accomplishes the negation of the Father's authority over society, thereby allowing unrighteousness and abomination ("human nature" 'liberated' from Godly restraint) freedom to reign. Marx wrote: "Once the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the holy family, the former must itself be annihilated [vernichtet] theoretically and practically." (Karl Marx, Theses On Feuerbach #4) Freud believed: "'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 [whether the biological father is present or not in the home does not matter, what matters is that the father's "top-down" authority, i.e. his "right-wrong" preaching and teaching way of thinking and acting no longer resides within the home, i.e. influencing the children's' feelings, thoughts, and actions (in this way the "parents" can be two or more women or men) ]." (Sigmund Freud as quoted in Herbart Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: A philosophical inquiry into Freud) According to Hegel, it is the child's nature ("human nature" 'liberated' from the father's authority) that is the core of 'reality.' "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 [once 'liberated' from the father's authority]." According to Hegel, when children become "equal" with the parents (making all, i.e. the "husband, the wife, and the child" subject to "human nature" only), that which belongs to the parents becomes the property of all, especially of those who "helped" 'liberate' the children (and the "parents") from parental authority. "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 the "cast-out ones" can take the father's property, business, family, and even his (and his born and unborn children's) life with impunity.
The "Educational Objective" of "Bloom's (Marzano's, Webb's) Taxonomies" is not only to use the classroom (the "group grade") to change the child's behavior toward the father's authority but to use "social environmental forces to change the parent's behavior toward the child" as well. (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) In the second "taxonomy"—in the "affective domain" book (the child's feelings book)—we read: "The affective domain [the child's feelings 'liberated' from the father's authority, i.e. "human nature" 'liberated' from Godly restraint] is, in retrospect, a virtual 'Pandora's Box [a box full of evils, which, once opened, once 'liberated' from the father's authority, can not be closed].'" "It is in this 'box' that the most influential controls are to be found. The affective domain [the child's carnal desires of the 'moment,' i.e. to have the gratifying things of the world, i.e. the child's "lust" for pleasure, and his resentment (hate) toward the father's authority when it prevents him from attaining it] contains the forces that determine the nature of an individual's life and ultimately the life of an entire people." (Taxonomy of Educational Objective Book 2: Affective Domain) 'Change' the child's feelings, thoughts, and actions toward the father's authority and you 'change' the world. It is what the 'change' process (dialectic 'reasoning'), i.e. Common Core is all about. Concerning this fact alone, that the "Taxonomies" are based upon the works of Erick Fromm, and Theodore Adorno, i.e. both who were members of "The Frankfurt School" (a band of Transformational Marxists who came to America in the early 30's—who merged Marxism with psychology, i.e. Marx with Freud, hiding Marxism in psychology, i.e. advancing the principles of Marxism through the praxis of psychotherapy, i.e. "group therapy," i.e. the "group grade"), it is no wonder education establishes the child's carnal nature, i.e. the carnal nature of man ("human nature") over and against the father's/Father's authority (Godly restraint), 'changing' the way the citizens of this nation now feel, think, and act toward parental authority, marriage, the unborn, the elderly, private property and business, etc. and Godly restraint, advancing unrighteousness, immorality, and abomination instead. "Any school which does not foster students' capacity for critical inquiry [which prevents the child from questioning and challenging the father's/Father's authority] is guilty of violent oppression." (Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed)
Negating the father's authority in the feelings, thoughts, and actions of the children (negating the "guilty conscience") 'changes' all facets of society, i.e. 'changes' the social order of things ('creating' a "new" world order) from the home to the workplace, the police, the military, the medical profession, the government, the media, entertainment, etc., even the "church." Through the children (including those in adult bodies) dialoging their opinions to a consensus, over social-individual (public-private) issues, in a facilitated meeting, "equality," i.e. a totalitarian state (subject to the child's carnal "human nature" only) is created, 'justifying' its use of force (coming between the citizens and local control, i.e. coming between the children and parental authority) to "serve and protect" unrighteousness and abomination, anarchy and revolution, i.e. "civil disobedience," i.e. disrespect for and contempt toward parental authority (private property and business) for the "good" of "the people." To produce children with a "guiltless conscience" (who feel, think, and act without Godly restraint, i.e. who feel, think, and act according to "human nature" only, i.e. with faith becoming subject to sight, i.e. with belief being treated as an opinion and facts and truth as a theory, etc.) the education system, the work place, the police force, the military, the medical profession, the government, the media, entertainment, and even the "church" must "tolerate deviance," i.e. "protect" unrighteousness and abomination from the father's/Father's authority, in the name of "community."
"Having eyes which are human eyes, and ears which are human ears" (Karl Marx), disrespect for authority and the killing of the innocent and helpless (the unborn and elderly) for the "good" of society is going on all around us, coming from the heart of the fatherless/Fatherless children. "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." 2 Timothy 4:3, 4
"And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear." Matthew 13:14-16
"... and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." 1 John 3:1 After all the gospel message is not just about the obedient Son. "I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me." John 5:30 "For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father who sent me, he gave me commandment what I should say, and what I should speak." John 12:49 It is about His Father as well, sending His only begotten Son to 'redeem' us from His wrath upon us for our disobedience, to 'reconcile' us to Himself instead. It is about the Son, in essence saying "I want you to meet my Father." "I want you to know my Father's love for you." To reject the Father is to reject the Son. "I and my Father are one." John 10:30 You can not have one without the other. Deny the one you deny the other. The One came that we might know and have fellowship with the Other: "Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen." Matthew 6:9-13
A Fatherless Christ is a "Christ" made in the image of man (dialectic, i.e. Fatherless in his feelings, thoughts, and actions), 'redeeming' man from the Father, 'reconciling' him to the world ("human nature") instead. "He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son." 1 John 3:22 All facilitator's of 'change' must, as Satan (the master facilitator of 'change'), come between the Father and His children, 'liberating' the children from the Father's authority in the name of "community" and 'change.'
Christ came to bring all children and parents, individually under His Heavenly Father's authority. "And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven." Matthew 23:9 "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 "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 "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 "Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven." Matthew 10:32, 33
"And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons
judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in
fear: Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as
silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your
fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and
without spot: Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world,
but was manifest in these last times for you, Who by him do believe in God, that
raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might
be in God. Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the
Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a
pure heart fervently: Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of
incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever."
1 Peter 1:17-23
© Institution for
Authority Research Dean Gotcher 1997-2014
© Institution for Authority Research Dean Gotcher 1997-2014