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

Over Your Head.
(Personal note.)

by
Dean Gotcher

"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." Isaiah 55:8, 9

"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

". . . it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps." Jeremiah 10:23

"It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." Matthew 4:4

In dialogue we direct our steps. In discussion God directs our steps. Dialogue is "of the world," where our carnal desires of the 'moment' that the world is stimulating has the final say. Discussion is of the father/Father, where the father/Father has the final say. While we have both discussion and dialogue as a part of our life, when we choose dialogue instead of discussion as the means to establishing right and wrong behavior we make ourselves, as God the decider of what is right and what is wrong behavior, with us having the final say, whereas when we choose discussion the father/Father is the decider of what is right and wrong behavior, i.e., the father/Father has the final say. All the world turns to dialogue to 'justify' its carnal nature. How the fellowship of believers (which is built upon discussion, where God and His Word has the final say) are turned into an apostate "church" is through their use of dialogue to explain the Word of God, making themselves God, the definer of what is right and what is wrong behavior, what God calls an abomination. This is all above our head as dialogue is such an "important" part of our life, "helping" us decide what we want to do today.

Dialogue ties us to the world while discussion ties us to the father's/Father's authority. When we use dialogue to establish right and wrong behavior we make ourself subject to the "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life," i.e., to "all that is in the world." When the father/Father establishes right and wrong behavior for us we can only discuss with him/Him any questions we might have, with the father/Father having the final say.

As will be explained in greater detail below dialogue is based upon how we "feel" and what we "think" (in response to the current situation and/or object, people, or person before us, whether real or in our imagination) while discussion is based upon "KNOWING"—because we have been told (with a consequence for disobeying or doing wrong). This correlates with our heart which by nature lusts after pleasure and hates restraint (hates missing out on pleasure), i.e., is "desperately wicked" (when pleasure is being taken away or we fear is going to be taken away) which we can not KNOW (our reaction is wrong) since lust i.e., our carnal desire of the 'moment' is standing in the way 'justifying' the hate (our reaction)—chastening is on its way to make it KNOWN (at least in the "old" world order where doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth ruled over our thoughts and actions, with the "new" world order basing right upon lust and the father's/Father's authority, i.e., chastening getting in the way, i.e., inhibiting or blocking lust as being wrong). An example would be (hopefully of less reaction) eating lunch at a buffy where you can choose the foods you like, which would correlate with dialogue (you are as a god, choosing right and wrong behavior, i.e., what you like and you do not like). But if you have been told there are certain foods that are bad for you (that you like), now you have to discuss with your self (and with others, if you choose) which foods you can eat and which ones you can (or should) not. ("Thy Word have I hid in mine heart that I might not to sin against thee." Psalms 119:11) If you go to dialogue you will go ahead and eat what you like (what you want). If you go to discussion you will not. Which one wins out (discussion or dialogue) determines what you will eat for lunch that day. We tend to mingle (juxtaposition) between the two (finding homeostasis), using dialogue, i.e., compromise in order to eat what we want. "Just a little tast." Reasoning based upon discussion results in us doing the father's/Father's will, i.e., doing what we have been told while 'reasoning' based upon dialogue results in us doing what we want. Those "of (and for) the world" go to dialogue, making any discussion subject to it (in 'justifying' their and other's lusts, removing or negating any consequence for their thoughts and actions, deceiving themselves and all who listen to them).

The laws of nature are established. We use "the scientific method," i.e., dialogue, i.e., "I feel" and "I think," i.e., testing our opinion to 'discover' them so we can use them for our benefit. In order to fly, for example (and not to kill yourself and/or others) the laws of drag, thrust, lift, and gravity need to be understood and applied (respected). The laws of nature are based upon stimulus-response. The problem comes when you us "the scientific method" to understand man's behavor. All you can ever end up with is the law of the flesh, i.e., "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life," i.e., only that which "is of the world" being 'justified.'

"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

The law of the flesh is different than the father/Father's authority. The father's/Father's authority is based upon two things, authoring and enforcing, i.e., being told what is right and what is wrong behavior and the consequence for doing or being wrong or disobeying. The father/Father 1) authors (preaches) commands and rules to be obeyed (as given), (teaches) facts and truth to be accepted as is (by faith) and applied, and discusses with those under his authority any questions they might have regarding his/His established commands, rules, facts, and truth (at his discretion, i.e., providing he/He deems it necessary, has time, those under his/His authority are able to understand, and are not questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking his/His authority) and enforces them, 2) rewarding those who do right and obey, 3) correcting and/or chastening those who do wrong and/or disobey, that he might learn to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline, capitulate their "self" in order to do right and not wrong according to his/His established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., in order to do his/His will, 4) casting out (expeling/grounding) anyone who questions, challenges, defies, disregards, attacks him/Him and his/His authority, which retains his/His authority in their thoughts, directly effecting their actions, resulting in their KNOWING right from wrong from being told (especially when it comes to behavior).

When it comes to behavior, the language structure of the father/Father is preaching, teaching, and discussing, with the father/Father having the final say—no compromise is accepted.

"In an ordinary discussion people usually hold relatively fixed positions and argue in favor of their views as they try to convince others to change." (Bohm and Peat, Science, Order, and Creativity)

"Sense experience must be the basis of all science." "Science is only genuine science when it proceeds from sense experience, in the two forms of sense perception and sensuous need, that is, only when it proceeds from Nature." (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3)

"The scientific method," conversely is based upon dialogue, where the person's "feelings" and "thoughts," his opinion being tested guide him in 'discovering' the answer. When applied to behavior he can only come to the conclusion that he is subject only to "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life," i.e., only to that which "is of the world." This is in harmony with Karl Marx's 'reasoning,' where he replaced "the lust of the flesh," "the lust of the eyes," and "the pride of life," that which is "of the world" with "sensuous needs," "sense perception," and "sense experience, "only that which is of Nature" making man subject only to stimulus-response, i.e., to approaching pleasure and avoiding (resenting or hating) pain which includes the hating of restraint, i.e., the hating of missing out on pleasure, therefore the hating of the father's/Father's authority. Unlike discussion, where the father/Father has the final say in dialogue man's carnal nature is 'justified,' i.e., is all there is that is of value (is actual or real), making man equal with one another according to what he has in common, i.e., his lust for pleasure and his hatred toward restraint, i.e., his hatred toward the father's/Father's authority for getting in the way.

"A dialogue is essentially a conversation between equals." "The spirit of dialogue, is in short, the ability to hold many points of view in suspension, along with a primary interest in the creation of common meaning." (Bohm and Peat, Science, Order, and Creativity)

"Words and actions should help to unite, and not divide, the people." (Mao Zedong)

When it comes to behavior when we replace discussion, where the father/Father has the final say with dialogue as our means of communication we make man's natural inclination to lust after pleasure and hate restraint the 'drive' of life and the removal of the father's/Father's authority from the environment (in order for all to become united on what they have in common) the 'purpose.' You can not have socialism (in any form) without the weakening of or the negation of the father's/Father's authority in the thoughts of men (accountability toward the earthly father, in the home and/or Heavenly Father above), directly effecting their actions. Unity can only become actualized via dialogue. Self interest, i.e., lust and dialogue go hand in hand. "Building relations on self interest," i.e., upon lust (upon what all men have in common) is the hallmark of Marxism (requiring the negation of the father's/Father's authority in order for it to become "actualized," i.e., in order for man to become "self-actualized").

"To enjoy the present reconciles us to the actual." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right')

When God created man He did something which he did with nothing else in the creation, He made him a "living soul." "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." (Genesis 2:7). He then did something which He did with nothing else in the creation, He told him what was right and what was wrong behavior and the consequence for disobedience. "And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." (Genesis 2:16, 17). Only man can be told or tell others what is right and what is wrong behavior. Only man can read or write a book. Only man (the soul) can KNOW from being told. All the rest of the creation (the flesh) is based upon stimulus-response—for living organisms, approach pleasure and avoid pain.

Since Adam had both discussion (being a "living soul") and dialogue (being a fleshy vessel) he could only use discussion with God, dialogue would make him equal with God which God would not allow. No animal could carry on a discussion or dialogue with Adam. In God creating the woman for Adam the tension Adam had was resolved, discussion with God and dialogue with the woman being the solution. Without the discussion (before God) we are subject only to dialogue (to our opinion) making our reasoning (and any discussion we have) subject to stimulus-response.

". . . it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps." Jeremiah 10:23

Without the Father (the father's/Father's authority system), i.e., law there is no sin, i.e., no disobedience. Without sin there is not need of a savior.

"He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son." 1 John 2:22

". . . prevent someone who KNOWS from filling the empty space." (Wilfred Bion, A Memoir of the Future)

The "secret" of the world is to use dialogue in establishing law (denying the Father and the Son in the process) in order for him to lust after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates without having a guilty conscience (since the guilty conscience is engendered from the father's/Father's authority), with everyone's affirmation, thus removing any fear of being judged, condemned, and cast out.

"Laws must not fetter human life [inhibit or block lust]; but yield to it; they must change as the needs [the lusts] and capacities [interests/attractions of lust] of the people change." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right')

"I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet." Romans 7:7

The gospel message is all about the Son of God, Jesus Christ doing the Father's will, i.e., doing what he was told, even dying on a cross, by his shed blood covering our sins (propitiation), doing so in obedience to the Father ("O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done." Matthew 26:42) asking all to follow Him doing the Father's will as He leads; "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.

"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 which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak." John 12:47-50

"Thou has love righteousness, and hated iniquity;" Hebrews 1:9 This defines the Son of God.

"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

"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

"And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven." Matthew 23:9

"Protestantism was the strongest force in the extension of cold rational individualism." (Max Horkheimer, Vernunft and Selbsterhaltung; English. Reasoning and Self Preservation)

Putting no man or object between you and the Father, i.e., "the priesthood of all believers," "doing your best as unto the Lord" is the hallmark of Protestantism. For socialism to function "reasoning" (Vernunft) must be made subject to "self preservation" (Selbsterhaltung) instead of subject to doing the father's/Father's will—engendering individualism, under God. By 'discovering' what a person is lusting after and focusing upon ('justifying') it, those "of (and for) the world" are able to make him subject to their control, i.e., "human resource."

"And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you." 2 Peter 2:3

All the facilitator of 'change' has to do (in a "positive" environment, i.e., in an environment which will not judge, condemn, or cast you out for lusting after pleasure or for being wrong) is ask you how you feel and what you think regarding the commands, rules, facts, and truth you have been taught (that get in the way of your carnal desires), especially when it comes to behavior and the facilitator of 'change' "owns" you. This applies to all who participate in the facilitated, dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process (establishing lust over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority). For example, using the Word of God, there are two paths which have been taken down through the ages, those who use discussion, retaining the integreity of the original manuscripts (known as the textus receptus) and those who use dialogue, changing the original manuscripts to fit with contemporary society (the Alexandrian, Gnostic, Catholice texts, i.e., the Metzger, Allend, and Nestly texts—which all contemporary "bibles" are translated from, and are use in Seminary to train up "ministers" as 'facilitators of change').Whoever defines terms for you controls your life. In discussion that is the father/Father. In dialogue that is the facilitator of 'change,' i.e., the seducer, deciever, and manipulator of men.

Carl Rogers, in his book on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy explained it best: "If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, the predicted behaviors [our potential ability to influence or control the behavior of groups] will follow." "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." "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 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." "By a careful design, we control not the final behavior, but the inclination to behavior—the motives, the desires, the wishes. The curious thing is that in that case the question of freedom never arises." (Rogers)

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9

Your carnal heart, the Karl Marx in you, thinking pleasure, i.e., lust is the standard for "good" instead of doing the father's/Father's becomes wicked, i.e., "desperately wicked" when it perceives someone is taking or is going to take what it is lusting after away. It can not see its hatred toward the father's/Father's authority as being evil, i.e., "wicked," i.e., "desperately wicked" because its lust for pleasure is standing in the way, 'justifying' the hate. (Mark 7:21-23)

Karl Marx described his heart, i.e., the human heart, with his, i.e., its use of dialogue to 'justify' his, i.e., its lust for pleasure and his, i.e., its hatred toward restraint (toward the restrainor). "Not feeling at home in the sinful world, Critical Criticism [dialogue, which is subject to the human (carnal) heart] must set up a sinful world in its own home." "Critical Criticism is a spiritualistic lord, pure spontaneity, actus purus, intolerant of any influence from without." (Karl Marx, The Holy Family) "Criticism is now simply a means. Indignation is its essential pathos, denunciation its principle task. Criticism is criticism in hand-to-hand combat. Criticism proceeds on to praxis [action]." "The critique of religion [hatred toward the father's/Father's authority] ends with the categorical imperative to overthrow all conditions in which man is a debased, enslaved, neglected, contemptible being [being called a sinner, thus being judged, condemned, cast out for his carnal thoughts and carnal actions]." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right)

"Building relationship upon self interest," i.e., upon lust is the hallmark of Marxism. It is a sad day when you have to explain Marxism in order to explain what is happening in the world around you today, even what is happening in the "church."

"To enjoy the present reconciles us to the actual." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right')

"Self-actualizing people . . . are world citizens, members of the human species first and foremost." (Abraham Maslow, The Farther Reaches of Human Nature)

In other words, according to Karl Marx it is lust, i.e., enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the current situation and/or object, people, or person is stimulating that makes us at-one-with the world, establishing lust over and therefore against the father/Father's authority that gets in the way. Self is therefore "actualized" in lust, not in doing the father's/Father's will. While the father/Father demands no compormise, society demands it.

"The real nature of man is the totality of social relations." (Karl Marx, Thesis on Feuerbach #6)

John Dewey wrote "It is not the will or desire of any one person which establish order but the moving spirit of the whole group. Control is social." (John Dewey, Experience and Education) "A democratic society repudiates the principle of external authority." "God is the source of corruption in individuals." (John Dewey, Democracy and Education)

"In a democratic society a patriarchal culture should make us depressed instead of glad; it is an argument against the higher possibilities of human nature, of self actualization." "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)

"It is not individualism that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society is the necessary framework through which freedom and individuality are made realities." (Karl Marx, in John Lewis, The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx)

In other words, according to Karl Marx the child having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline, capitulate his "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will is not what "fulfills" the child. "On the contrary" it is the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the child having to do right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's established commands, rules, facts, and truth that "destroys him," i.e., that prevents him from becoming his self, thinking and acting according to his carnal nature, i.e., according to what he has in common with all the children of the world. The child's desire for approval from others, requiring him to compromise in order to "get along," i.e., in order to build relationship "is the necessary framework through which freedom" from the father's/Father's authority and "freedom" to lust after pleasure, i.e., to do what he wants without having a guilty conscience (which the father's/Father's authority engenders) "are made reality."

"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." "Self-perfection of the human individual is fulfilled in union with the world in pleasure." "According to Freud, the ultimate essence of our being is erotic." "Eros is fundamentally a desire for union with objects in the world." "Eros is the foundation of morality." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)

According to Sigmund Freud the guilty conscience is a product of the father's/Father's authority, which sustains the father's/Father's authority in society. It is only in the "social group" that the guilty conscience can negated. According to the Marxist, Norman O. Brown without the "social group" the child and society remains subject to the father's/Father's authority. Therefore the child and society can only be liberated from the father's/Father's authority and the guilty conscience which the father's/Father's authority engenders in the "social group," which 'justifies' the child's carnal nature, i.e., Eros, i.e., lust.

"(T)he 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)

"It is usually easier to change individuals formed into a group than to change any one of them separately." "The individual accepts the new system of values and beliefs by accepting belongingness to the group." (Kurt Lewin in Benne)

"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." (Kurt Lewin in Wilbur Brookover, A Sociology of Education)

"Change in methods of leadership is probably the quickest way to bring about a change in the cultural atmosphere of a group." "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)

"Once the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the Holy family, the former must then itself be destroyed [vernichtet, i.e., annihilated, i.e., negated] in theory and in practice." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #4)

While the heavenly Father is holy and the earthly father is born into sin both have the same authority system, preaching commands and rules to be obeyed as given, teaching facts and truth to be accepted as is (at first at least by faith) and applied, discussing with those under his/His authority any questions they might have regarding his/His commands, rules, facts, and truth, providing he/He deems it necessary, has time, those under his/His authority are able to understand, and are not questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking his/His authority, 2) rewarding those who do right and obey, 3) correcting and/or chastening those who do wrong and/or disobey, that they might learn to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline, capitulate their "self" in order to do right and not wrong according to the established commands, rules, facts, and truth they have been taught (told), i.e., in order to do the father's/Fathers' will, and 4) casting out (expels/grounds) those who question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack his/His authority, which restrains the father's/Father's authority system in the child's/man's thoughts, directing effecting his actions, resulting in the those under the father's/Father's authority KNOWING right from wrong from being told (especially when it comes to behavior).

It is the guilty conscience, which is engendered by the father's/Father's authority that sustains the father's/Father's authority in the child and in society.

"The guilty conscience is formed in childhood by the incorporation of the parents and the wish to be father of oneself." "What we call 'conscience' perpetuates inside of us our bondage to past objects now part of ourselves:'" (Brown) A definition of the guilty conscience by a Marxist's perspective.

"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." (Dr. Robert Trojanowicz, The meaning of "Community" in Community Policing) Trojanowicz then promotes bringing the police and the community together with the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process, negating local control, i.e., the father's/Father's authority system. Done with the use of 'crime' to bring "the people" together.

There is no father's/Father's authority, i.e., judgment, condemnation, fear of being cast out in dialogue therefore using dialogue to establish right and wrong behavior negates not only the father's/Father's authority it negates the guilty conscience as well.

"The negative valence of a forbidden object which in itself attracts the child [the guilty conscience] thus usually derives from an induced field of force of an adult." "If this field of force loses its psychological existence for the child (e.g., if the adult goes away or loses his authority) the negative valence also disappears." (Kurt Lewin, A Dynamic Theory of Personality)

While the guilty conscience ties the child to the father/Father or rather the father/Father to the child the "super-ego" ties the child to society.

"Superego development is conceived as the incorporation of the moral standards of society. Therefore the levels of the Taxonomy should describe successive levels of goal setting appropriate to superego development." (Book 2: Affective Domain)

It is the father's/Father's authority system itself that Karl Marx was out to negate. Having denied the Heavenly Father's authority all he had to negate was the earthly father's authority (which he believed engendered the Heavenly Father's authority, i.e., religion) Sigmund Freud had the same agenda.

"... the hatred against patriarchal suppression—a 'barrier to incest,' ... the desire (for the sons) to return to the mother culminates in the rebellion of the exiled sons, the collective killing and devouring of the father." "'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 [the husband/father no longer exercises his authority in the home, over his wife/children]." (Sigmund Freud in Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: a psychological inquiry into Freud)

Sigmund Freud's history of the prodigal son is not of the son coming to his senses, humbling his self, returning home, submitting his self to his father's authority, learning his inheritance was not his father's money but his father's love for him (Luke 15:11-24), but of the son joining with his "friends," returning home, killing the father, taking all that was his (the father's), using it to satisfy their carnal desires, i.e., their lusts, killing all the fathers in the land (devouring the fathers) so all the children could be the same, i.e., like them, thereby affirming them, i.e., their "incest," 'justifying' and supporting their control over them.

"Marxian theory needs Freudian-type instinct theory to round it out. And of course, vice versa." "Third-Force psychology is also epi-Marxian in these senses, i.e., including the most basic scheme as true-good social conditions are necessary for personal growth, bad social conditions stunt human nature,... This is to say, one could reinterpret Marx into a self-actualization-fostering Third- and Fourth-Force psychology-philosophy. And my impression is anyway that this is the direction in which they are going now." (Abraham Maslow, The Journals of Abraham Maslow)

In other words society needs man's natural inclination to lust after pleasure in order to become one and man's natural inclination to lust after pleasure needs societies 'justification.' The 'liberation' of self, i.e., of lust out from under the father's/Father's authority "is necessary for personal growth," while submission of self to the father's/Father's authority "stunt(s) human nature." Marxism is philosophy and psychology becoming at-one-with one another. It is in dialogue (which does not recognize the father's/Father's authority) that all can become one, "bypass" the father's/Father's authority in making rules, policies, and law, i.e., in establishing right and wrong behavior—resulting in lust being right and the father's/Father's authority being wrong.

"In the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself in the other, they experience the common ground of their existence." (Jürgen Habermas, Knowledge & Human Interest, Chapter Three: The Idea of the Theory of Knowledge as Social Theory)

"Bypassing the traditional channels of 'top-down' decision making our objective center's upon transformation public opinion into an effective instrument of global politics." "Individual values must be measured by their contribution to common [lust] 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) This from the man who developed the theory of "climate change."

"The philosophers have only interpreted the world in different ways, the objective however, is change." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #11) Inscribed on Karl Marx's tomb so it must be important.

In other words it is the father's authority system, i.e., the father's established commands, rules, facts, and truth (which differ from father to father) that divides the people. It is in the child's propensity to respond ('change' in accordance) to the situation and/or object, people, or person in the 'moment that is the objective of life. Without the "help" of the facilitator of 'change' the children remain subject to the father's/Father's authority system. The facilitator of 'change,' perceiving his self as being the personification of "the people," who, like him lust after the carnal pleasures of the moment the world stimulates, hating restraint, sees it as his duty to 'justify' the people's natural inclination to lust after pleasure in order to 'justify' his natural inclination to lust after pleasure. When you question the facilitator of 'change's' actions he will respond with "It is not just about you," really meaning "It is all about me, so I can lust after pleasure without having a guilty conscience, with your affirmation. If you refuse to affirm me, i.e., my lusts or get in my way 'the people' will remove (negate) you (since having 'justifying' their lusts I now 'own' them). It appears I must keep an eye on you from now on for my 'good.'" This is the true meaning of "sight based management."

"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 Book 2: Affective Domain)

All "educators" are certified and schools accredited based upon their use of what are called "Bloom's Taxonomies" in their classroom. Ask any teacher today if they have ever heard of "Bloom's Taxonomies" and they will probably smile, thinking you are a fellow "comrade" ready to inform them on some new way of applying it in the classroom. Any teacher questioning and/or challenging their use in the classroom will be looking for another job, if they can find one—having been labeled "unfit" to teach.

"Blooms' Taxonomies" are "a psychological classification system" used "to develop attitudes and values ... which are not shaped by the parents." "Ordering" "different kinds of affective behavior," i.e., "the range of emotion(s)" "organized into value systems and philosophies of life." "It was the view of the group that educational objectives stated in the behavior form have their counterparts in the behavior of individuals, observable and describable therefore classifiable [true science is "observable and repeatable," i.e., objective, i.e., constant not "observable and describable," i.e., subject to an opinion, i.e., subject to 'change']." "Only those educational programs which can be specified in terms of intended student behaviors can be classified." "What we are classifying is the intended behavior of students—the ways in which individuals are to act, think, or feel as the result of participating in some unit of instruction." "… ordering and relating the different kinds of affective behavior." "… we need to provide the range of emotion from neutrality through mild to strong emotion, probably of a positive, but possibly also of a negative, kind." "… organized into value systems and philosophies of life …" "...many of these changes are produced by association with peers who have less authoritarian points of view, as well as through the impact of a great many courses of study in which the authoritarian pattern is in some ways brought into question while more rational and nonauthoritarian behaviors are emphasized." "The student must feel free to say he disliked _____ and not have to worry about being punished for his reaction." (Book 1: Cognitive Domain and Book 2: Affective Domain)

"The affective domain [the student's natural inclination to "lust" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world (including "the group") stimulates and hate restraint] contains the forces that determine the nature of an individual's life and ultimately the life of an entire people." "The affective domain is, in retrospect, a virtual 'Pandora's Box' [a "box" full of evils, which once opened, can not be closed—once the father's/Father's authority, i.e., fear of judgment, i.e., "the lid" is removed it is difficult if not impossible to put it back on again].' It is in this 'box' that the most influential controls are to be found." "In fact, a large part of what we call "good teaching" is the teacher's ability to attain affective objectives ['liberating' the child's carnal thoughts from the father's/Father's authority] through challenging the student's fixed beliefs [challenging the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth] and getting them to discuss issues [evaluating the world through their carnal desires, i.e., their "lusts," i.e., their "self interests" of the 'moment']." (Book 2: Affective Domain)

"In the more traditional society a philosophy of life, a mode of conduct, is spelled out for its members at an early stage in their lives." "A major function of education in such a society is to achieve the internalization of this philosophy." "This is not to suggest that education in an open society does not attempt to develop personal and social values." "It does indeed." "But more than in traditional societies it allows the individual a greater amount of freedom in which to achieve a Weltanschauung1." "1Cf. Erich Fromm, 1941; T. W. Adorno et al., 1950." (Book 2: Affective Domain)

Erich Fromm and T. W. Adorno, who Bloom refered to as representing his Weltanschauung or world view were Marxists. Yes I said Marxists—members of the "Frankfurt School," formerly known as "The Institute of Social Research" who, fleeing Fascist Germany came to America in the early 30's, entered our Universities raising up Marxists who entered our classrooms, workplaces, government, and even the "church" replacing discussion with dialogue in establishing behavior.

The Marxist Erich Fromm wrote: "We are proud that in his conduct of life man has become free from external authorities, which tell him what to do and what not to do." "All that matters is that the opportunity for genuine activity be restored to the individual; that the purposes of society [lust] and of his own [lust] become identical." "... to give up 'God' and to establish a concept of man as a being ... who can feel at home in it [the world] if he achieves union with his fellow man and with nature [his and other's carnal nature and the world that stimulates it]." (Erick Fromm, Escape from Freedom)

The Marxist Theodor Adorno wrote: "Authoritarian submission [humbling, denying, dying to, controlling, disciplining, capitulating one's "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will] 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." "Submission to authority, desire for a strong leader, subservience of the individual to the state [parental authority, local control, Nationalism], and so forth, have so frequently and, as it seems to us, correctly, been set forth as important aspects of the Nazi creed that a search for correlates of prejudice had naturally to take these attitudes into account." "Family relationships are characterized by fearful subservience to the demands of the parents and by an early suppression of impulses not acceptable to them." "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) The error in Adorno's "logic" is that all forms of socialism, including Fascism must negate the father's/Father's authority in the home/in the individual in order to initiate and sustain the socialist's control over the individual, i.e., "the people."

The "educator" (the facilitator of 'change') does not have to tell the students to question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack their parent's authority when they get home from school, if they were not doing that already (telling them would be "old school," maintaining the "old" world order of being told even if it was done for the 'purpose' of 'change,' i.e., for the 'purpose' of creating a "new" world order), all they have to do is use a curriculum in the classroom that "encourages," i.e., pressures the students to participate in the process of 'change,' i.e., into dialoguing their opinions to a consensus, 'justifying' their carnal nature, i.e., "lust" over and therefore against their parent's authority. Being told to be "positive" (supportive of the other students carnal nature) and not "negative" (judging them by their parent's standards) pressures students to 'justify' their and the other students love of pleasure and hate of restrain, doing so in order to be approved, i.e., affirmed by "the group," resulting in "the group" labeling those students who, holding onto their parent's standards, i.e., refusing to participate in the process of 'change' or fighting against it as being "negative," divisive, hateful, intolerant, maladjusted, unadaptable to 'change,' resisters of 'change,' not "team players," lower order thinkers, in denial, phobic, prejudiced, judgmental, racist, fascist, dictators, anti-social, etc., i.e., "hurting" people's "feelings" resulting in "the group" rejecting them—the student's natural desire for approval and fear of rejection forces him to participate. The same outcome applies to all adults, in any profession who participate in the process. Once you are 'labeled,' you are 'labeled' for life. In the soviet union, once you were 'labeled' "psychological," no matter how important you were in the past, your life was over, your career was done.

By replacing discussion with dialogue, when it comes to behavior and the deed is done.

"The transgression of the wicked saith within my heart, that there is no fear of God before his eyes. For he flattereth himself in his own eyes, until his iniquity be found to be hateful. The words of his mouth are iniquity and deceit: he hath left off to be wise, and to do good. He deviseth mischief upon his bed; he setteth himself in a way that is not good; he abhorreth not evil." Psalms 36:1-4

"For the wicked boasteth of his heart's desire, and blesseth the covetous, whom the LORD abhorreth. The wicked, through the pride of his countenance, will not seek after God: God is not in all his thoughts." Psalms 10:3, 4

"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

"For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away." 1 Timothy 3:2-5

"And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty." 2 Corinthians 6:15-18

Facilitators of 'change,' i.e., psychologists, i.e., behavioral "scientists," i.e., "group psychotherapists," i.e., Marxists (Transformational Marxists)—all being the same in method or formula—are using the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus (affirmation) process, i.e., dialectic 'reasoning' ('reasoning' from/through the students "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., from/through their "lust" for pleasure and their hate of restraint, in the "light" of their desire for group approval, i.e., affirmation and fear of group rejection) in the "group grade," "safe zone/space/place," "Don't be negative, be positive," "open ended, non-directed," soviet style, brainwashing (washing the father's/Father's authority from the children's thoughts and actions, i.e., "theory and practice," negating their having a guilty conscience, which the father's/father's authority engenders for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in the process—called "the negation of negation" since the father's/Father's authority and the guilty conscience, being negative to the child's carnal nature, is negated in dialogue—in dialogue, opinion, and the consensus process there is no father's/Father's authority, i.e., no established aka absolute command, rule, facts, or truth to be accepted as is, by faith and obeyed; there is only the person's carnal desires, i.e., lusts of the past and the present being verbally expressed and 'justified'), inductive 'reasoning' ('reasoning' from/through the students "feelings," i.e., their natural inclination to "lust" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment'—dopamine emancipation—which the world stimulates, i.e., their "self interest," i.e., their "sense experience," selecting "appropriate information"—excluding, ignoring, or resisting, i.e., rejecting any "inappropriate" information, i.e., established command, rule, fact, or truth that gets in the way of their desired outcome, i.e., pleasure—in determining right from wrong behavior), "Bloom's Taxonomy," "affective domain," French Revolution (Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité) classroom "environment" in order (as in "new" world order) to 'liberate' children from parental authority, i.e., from the father's/Father's authority system (the Patriarchal Paradigm)—as predators, charlatans, pimps, pedophiles, seducing, deceiving, and manipulating them as chickens, rats, and dogs, i.e., treating them as natural resource ("human resource") in order to convert them into 'liberals,' socialists, globalists, so they, 'justifying' their "self" before one another, can do wrong, disobey, sin, i.e., can "lust" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates, with impunity.

"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

Home schooling material, co-ops, conferences, etc., are joining in the same praxis, fulfilling Immanuel Kant's as well as Georg Hegel's, Karl Marx's, and Sigmund Freud's agenda of using the pattern or method of Genesis 3:1-6, i.e., "self" 'justification,' i.e., dialectic (dialogue) 'reasoning," i.e., 'reasoning' from/through your "feelings," i.e., your carnal desires of the 'moment' which are being stimulated by the world (including your desire for approval from others, with them affirming your carnal nature) in order to negate Hebrews 12:5-11, i.e., the father's/Father's authority, i.e., having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline, capitulate your "self" (your lusts) in order to do the father's/Father's will, negating Romans 7:14-25, i.e., your having a guilty conscience when you do wrong, disobey, sin, thereby negating your having to repent before the father/Father for your doing wrong, disobedience, sins—which is the real agenda.

"And for this cause [because men, as "children of disobedience," 'justify' their "self," i.e., 'justify' their love of "self" and the world, i.e., their love of the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation) which the world stimulates over and therefore against the Father's authority] God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie [that pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the Father's will]: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth [in the Father and in His Son, Jesus Christ], but had pleasure in unrighteousness [in their "self" and the pleasures of the 'moment,' which the world stimulates]." 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 12

© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2024 (2/17/2024)