Concerning language: by Dean Gotcher

by
Dean Gotcher

Language (in regards to its form or structure) is from culture. 'Change' the language and you 'change' the culture. What did God do at the Tower of Babel? This was not missed by those of dialectic 'reasoning,' their idea being: restore a universal language, i.e. create language based upon the "common 'feelings' and 'thoughts'" (opinions and theories) of men and you can restore the world to a "one" world culture. The culture of the Father (the Patriarchal Paradigm) inhibits 'change.' The culture of the children (the Heresiarchal Paradigm) engenders 'change.' The culture of the Father, with His "top-down" Patriarchal Paradigm of 'unchangingness,' His language of "Do what I say," and "Because I said so," i.e. the Father preaching and teaching truth, establishing right and wrong, good and evil, according to His will, is 'changed' (negated) with the culture of "the children of disobedience," with their "equality" (Tower of Babel) Heresiarchal Paradigm of 'changingness,' their language of "I feel," and "I think," i.e. the children dialoguing their opinions of 'changing' truth, determining right and wrong, good and evil according to their carnal "human nature" and the current situation (situation ethics), i.e. all therefore becoming subject to the environmental 'changes' and man's "felt" needs of the 'moment.' The "stimulus-response" structure of psychology and sociology, i.e. of dialectic 'reasoning,' comes from the latter. The person controlling the environment, controls the language, controls the culture. Without God and His Word ruling over men's hearts, man ends up with "human nature" controlling him, negating individualism, "Mine, not yours" of the "top-down" Patriarchal culture of 'unchangingness.' and replacing it with socialism, "Ours, not just yours." of the "equality" Heresiarchal culture of 'change.'

"If a paradigm [a culture 'change'] is ever to triumph it must gain some first supporters, men who will develop it to the point where hardheaded arguments [hard to resist in the 'moment'] can be produced and multiplied (which eventuates) an increasing shift in the distribution of professional allegiances [to question "the group" is to put oneself at peril] (whereupon) the man who continues to resist after his whole profession has been converted is ipso facto ceased to be a scientist [is 'labeled' as being "irrational" (psychotic, anti-social) and therefore no longer "relevant"]." (Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions)

"Scientific knowledge [as in behavior "science," "so called science," dialectic 'reasoning,' not true science which is universal, crossing all cultures], like language, is intrinsically the common property of a group or else nothing at all. To understand it we shall need to know the special characteristics of the groups that create and use it." (Kuhn)

"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." (Thomas Kuhn quoting Max Planck's famous dictum)

"Thomas S Kuhn spent the year 1958-1959 at the Center for Advanced Studies in the Behavior Sciences, directed by Ralph Tyler, where he finalized his 'paradigm shift' concept of 'Pre- and Post-paradigm periods.'" "Kuhn admitted problems with the schemata of his socio-psychological theory yet continued to urge its application into the scientific fields of astronomy, physics, chemistry and biology." (Kuhn)

As Nome Chomsky's dialectic grammar (which can not properly diagram the scriptures, being based upon "human nature" only) does not work (replacing a Patriarchal language of "can" and "can not" with a Heresiarchal language of "ought" for the 'purpose' of 'change'). So to the dialectic culture of "equality" (man finding agreement upon "human nature" and therefore creating peace based upon "human nature") does not work (replacing a Patriarchal culture of accountability to higher authority with a Heresiarchal culture of "tolerance of ambiguity" for the 'purpose' of 'change,' engendering anarchy, despotism, and abomination). This is true for the scriptures as well. Translations today come from a dialectic Greek source of 'change' (heresy sources), i.e. from Metzger's, Nestles', Aland's Greek, based upon Westcott and Hort's heretical sources, Vaticanus B, Sinaiticus אּ, and Codex X, i.e. of Origin's, Eusebius', Jerome's, Alexandrian, etc heresy texts.

This is why Tyndale, in his translation of the Greek to the English language, would not change the Word of God (the Textus Receptus) to fit it to the English language (making it subject to men's opinions, how man "feels" or what he "thinks," as the heresy sources do), instead leaving the Greek words Greek, when there was no English equivalent. The Word of God is a culture (spiritual, not of this world, spoken into this world by the Holy Spirit). Re-writing, i.e. translating from a heresy source or interpreting and extrapolating the Word of God to synthesize it with (make it at-one-with) the cultures of the world makes it no longer the Word of God but rather the opinion of men, making God subject to the culture (subject to "human nature") instead of the culture (the souls of man, under conviction) subject to God.