Thesis - Antithesis - Synthesis

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." Proverbs 3:5, 6

Thesis - Antithesis - Synthesis - What Does It Mean?

Dean Gotcher

Benjamin Bloom: "Bloom's Taxonomies" are "a psychological classification system" used "to develop attitudes and values ... which are not shaped by the parents," "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)

Benjamin Bloom: "We recognize the point of view that truth and knowledge are only relative and that there are no hard and fast truths which exist for all time and places." (Benjamin Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 1: Cognitive Domain)

Fredrich Engels: "In the eyes of the dialectic philosophy, nothing is established for all times, nothing is absolute or sacred." (Fredrich Engels, explaining Marxism)

1 John 2:16 "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."

All teachers are certified and schools accredited today based upon their use of what are called "Bloom's Taxonomies" as their curriculum in the classroom (where, when it comes to defining and establishing behavior dialogue, how the students feel replaces discussion, having to do what the Father says, resulting in the students having the final say). The "Taxonomies" make the students the Thesis according to what they have in common, their lust for pleasure and hatred toward restraint, called the "affective domain," thereby making the Father's authority, His established commands, rules, facts, and truth that judge, condemn, and cast them out for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, for lusting after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates instead of doing His will the antithesis. In doing so the students become one according to what they have in common, their lust for pleasure and their hatred toward restraint, refusing to submit to the Father's authority in discussion, where the Father has the final say.

Jeremiah 6:16 "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."

2 Timothy 4:3, 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."

Proverbs 4:1 "Hear, ye children, the instruction of a father, and attend to know understanding."

Proverbs 15:32 "He that refuseth instruction despiseth his own soul: but he that heareth reproof getteth understanding."

Thesis is who has the final say. Antithesis is who has to obey, get out of the way, or be removed. Synthesis is unity based upon what everyone has in common. The Father's authority (both Heavenly and earthly fathers) is based upon those under His authority doing right and not wrong according to His established commands, rules, facts, and truth, being rewarded if they obey, chastened if they disobey, and cast out if they question, challenge, defy, or disregard His authority. If there are any questions discussion takes place with the Father having the final say. The child's carnal nature is based upon approaching pleasure and avoiding pain, stimulus-response using dialogue to 'justify' his self. In discussion God is God. In dialogue the child is God. Thesis based upon discussion makes dialogue the antithesis, especially when it comes to behavior, preventing synthesis, the Father having the final say. If you make dialogue the means of communication, that is if you make dialogue the Thesis when it comes to behavior the Father's authority is negated, engendering all who participate in dialogue becoming one, that is engendering synthesis. This is a gnostic construct of "so called science." When education went from discussion, with the parents having the final say to dialogue, with the children having the final say the nation was 'changed.'

1 Timothy 6:20-21 "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen."

In short bringing dialogue into the classroom when it comes to behavior negates the Father's authority, making the children one according to their carnal nature.

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

When the Father (insisting upon His children doing right and not wrong according to His established commands, rules, facts, and truth, with Him having the final say) is the Thesis, His children (lusting after pleasure and hating restraint) become the Antithesis. With the Father having the final say, when it comes to behavior children can not find their identity in their self, having to find it in the Father instead. Thus the Father's authority prevents synthesis (socialism), that is prevents the children from becoming at-one-with the children of the world, thinking and acting according to what they have in common, their lust for pleasure and hatred toward restraint. Not until the child is made the Thesis, thus negating the Father's authority, can synthesis become reality, where all the children of the world can become as one based upon that they all have in common, their lust for pleasure and hatred toward restraint. Discussion is of the Father, is being told. Dialogue, on the other hand is of the flesh, is subject to "sense experience," is subject to the world only. When true science, two plus two equals four and can not be any other number becomes subject to dialogue, to "I feel" and "I think" it becomes known as "so called science," making man, when used to define and establish behavior subject to his carnal nature only.

Karl Marx: "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)

Carl Rogers, in his book on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy wrote:: "Experience is, for me, the highest authority." "Neither the Bible nor the prophets, neither the revelations of God can take precedence over my own direct experience." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)

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

Bohm and Peat: "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)

Knowing right from wrong from being told is of the Father. Stimulus-response is of the child.

This the liberal understands. I doubt if many people know or have stopped to think about it. It is important to know. Discussion and dialogue are two different political systems. Discussion is of the Father, with the Father, when it comes to behavior having the final say. Doing his will being right. Not doing his will being wrong. Being held accountable for being or doing wrong. This rigid right-wrong way of thinking is of the Father, reflected in the Word of God. While we have both, which one we turn to when it comes to behavior defines who we are, whether we are subject to the Father, doing the Father's will or subject to the flesh and the world that stimulates it, doing our will instead.

Romans 6:16 "Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?"

Dialogue is of the child, with the child, when it comes to behavior wanting the final say. Lusting after pleasure being right. Not being able to have what he wants being wrong. The ever "changingness" of feelings, approaching pleasure and avoiding pain (including the pain of missing out on pleasure) in response to the changing environment is of the child.

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

Protestantism, the priesthood of all believers, doing your best as unto the Lord, putting no man between you and the Lord was recognized by the Marxist Max Horkheimer as the source of individualism, under God, needing to be negated if globalism was to become reality. Protestantism rejected stimulus-response, that is the idea that by 'creating' a healthy environment (whatever that might be) you can 'create' a healthy person, the ideology of philosophy, psychology, the "ologies" of human behavior. Nothing in the creation can change a man's heart. Only the work of Christ, and Christ alone can change a man's heart.

The more society goes to dialogue, when it comes to defining and establishing behavior the more unstable it becomes.

Karl Marx: "The philosophers have only interpreted the world in different ways, the objective however, is change." (Karl Marx, Eleventh Thesis on Feuerbach, which is inscribed on Karl Marx's tomb)

All Karl Marx was saying is that the fathers (who he called "philosophers"), equated to the head of the home, the tribe, the nation, the religious group, and so forth, who differ in position from one another are the cause of division amongst the children, that is "the people." For unity, that is "worldly peace and socialist harmony" to become reality, where man can sin without feeling guilty, without being judged, condemned, and cast out agents of 'change,' known as 'change' agents or facilitators of 'change' (in his day called the "vanguard party") must "help" the children, "the people" 'liberate' themselves from the Father's authority, as the master facilitator of 'change' did in the garden in Eden, replacing discussion, what the Father says with dialogue, their "feelings" of the 'moment' so they can be their self, able to lust after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world is stimulating without having a guilty conscience, without being judged, condemned, and cast out, that is with "the people's" affirmation.

Ronald Havelock: A "change agent... should know about the process of change, how it takes place and the attitudes, values and behaviors that usually act as barriers.... He should know who in his system are the 'defenders' or resisters of innovations [that is resisters of 'change']." (Ronald Havelock, A Change Agent's Guide to Innovation in Education)

A Federal Grant reads: "During the period of innovation [that is 'change' is taking place], an environment is invisible. The present is always invisible because the whole field of attention is so saturated with it. It becomes visible only when is has been superseded by a new environment." (Federal Education Grant, Dec. 1969, Behavior Science in Teacher Education Program—commonly referred to as B-STEP)

In the process of 'change' you will not know of the 'change' that has taken place until after it has taken place because in the midst of the 'change' process you were getting what you wanted, what you were lusting after, without the Father getting in your way, who is missing in the new political system you just set in place.

Abraham Maslow: "When we learn to silence the inner voice that judges yourself and others, there is no limit to what we can accomplish, individually and as part of a team. Absence of judgment makes you more receptive to innovative ideas." (Michael Ray in Abraham Maslow, Maslow on Management)

Abraham Maslow: "I have found whenever I ran across authoritarian students [those who adhere to the father's/Father's authority] 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)

If I have twenty students from different homes, whose fathers differ from one another on established commands, rules, facts, and truth I have twenty students divided from one another if they are 'loyal' to their father's authority. The only way I can make them one is to focus upon what they have in common, their lust for pleasure and resentment toward restraint. In other words, it is the father's authority system, that is 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 authority system.

All the facilitator of 'change' has to do (in a "positive" environment, that is 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 authority).

Psalms 36:1-4 "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 10:3, 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."

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

Norman Brown: "Self-perfection of the human individual is fulfilled in union with the world in pleasure." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History) Brown in his book explains that Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud both had the same agenda, the removal of the Father's authority, for Marx from society, for Freud from the mind of the individual. In other words, according to Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud it is lust, what all men have in common that 'reconciles' man to the world. Until lust is 'liberated' from the Father's authority the individual and society can not become of its self, only "of and for the world."

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

According to Marx it is only in society, which requires compromise that man can find himself.

Martin Jay: "As the Frankfurt School [a group of Marxist who fleeing Fascist Germany in the early 30's came to America, who entered our Universities, training up Marxist professors, business men, and government advisers and leaders, creating organizations and institutes to further the expanse of Marxism not only in America but around the world] wrestled with how to 'reinvigorate Marx', they 'found the missing link in Freud.'" (Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research, 1923-1950)

According to Brown, Sigmund Freud believed "the individual is emancipated in the social group." "Freud commented that only through the solidarity of all the participants could the sense of guilt [the guilty conscience for disobeying the Father] be assuaged." (Brown, Life Against Death)

Norman Brown: "According to Freud, the ultimate essence of our being is erotic, and demands activity according to the pleasure-principle. The foundation on which the man of the future will be built is already there, in the repressed unconscious; the foundation has to be recovered." "Eros is fundamentally a desire for union with objects in the world." "Eros is the foundation of morality."(Brown, Life Against Death)

The overall logic is behavior must become subject to the child's carnal nature, to the child's desire for the pleasures of the 'moment' that the world is stimulating along with his dissatisfaction with the Father's authority if society is to be 'liberated' from the Father's authority. This is done through the use of dialogue and the consensus process, putting the child's carnal nature into practice, into social action while dealing with personal-social crisis' (known as praxis).

Antonio Gramsci: "The philosophy of praxis is the absolute secularization of thought, an absolute humanism of history." (Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks)

Herbert Marcuse, quoting Sigmund Freud: "... 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." (Sigmund Freud in Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: a psychological inquiry into Freud)

Freud's history is of the son's, who, because of their immoral behavior were cast out of the home by the Father, uniting as one, came back home, not only killing the Father but "devouring" him as well, that is by using dialogue (which does not recognize the Father's authority) in defining and establishing behavior, 'liberate' the rest of the children from the Father's authority, doing so in order for society (from then on) to no longer recognize the Father's authority, making sure all rules, policies, and laws are made through the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process, which excludes the Father's authority from any outcome.

Marcuse: "'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."

In other words the Father can stay around as long as he, when it comes to defining and establishing behavior 'joins' with the children through dialogue, no longer insists upon children doing things his way. To focus on the family, for the sake of building relationship, using dialogue to bring the father, the mother, and the children "together" automatically negates the Father's authority, that is neuters the Father in the home, its intended 'purpose.'

Again, 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, that is their lusts, killing all the fathers in the land (devouring the fathers) so all the children could be the same, that is like them, thereby affirming them, that is their "incest," 'justifying' and supporting their control over them. Both Brown and Marcuse recognized the use of dialogue in the garden in Eden, where the woman replaced God's authority, His Word with herself, with her lusts, with her carnal desires, with how she felt and what she thought in the 'moment,' with psychology.

Norman Brown: "To experience Freud is to partake a second time of the forbidden fruit;"

Herbert Marcuse: "... 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.'"

Abraham Maslow: "Third-Force psychology is also epi-Marxian in these senses, i.e., including the most basic scheme as true-good social conditions [an environment void of the Father's authority where children can "actualize" their "self" without fear of being judged, condemned, and cast out] are necessary for personal growth, bad social conditions [where children have to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline their "self" in order to do the Father's, that is their parents will] 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." "The whole discussion becomes species-wide, One World." "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.)" (Abraham Maslow, The Journals of Abraham Maslow)

Abraham Maslow: "Self-actualizing people have to a large extent transcended the values of their culture [that is have rejected their parent's and-or God the Father's authority]. They are not so much merely Americans as they are world citizens, members of the human species [that is they are of and for the world only—they are of and for the world that stimulates lust for pleasure and hatred toward restraint] first and foremost." (Abraham Maslow, The Farther Reaches of Human Nature)

1 John 2:16 "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."

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

Our unregenerated heart, thinking pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the Father's will hates anyone preventing it from enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that it is lusting after or threatening to take it away (why it becomes "desperate"). The unregenerated heart (the Karl Marx in you) cannot see its hatred toward the Father's authority as being evil, that is "wicked," that is "desperately wicked" because its lust for pleasure is standing in the way, 'justifying' the hate. (Mark 7:21-23)

Psalms 119:11 "Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee."

1 Corinthians 1:18 "For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God."

David is simply saying, God's word, that is what the Father says, who has the final say (as in discussion) have I put in my heart (which wants to dialogue, that is have its own way) that I might not do what I want and sin. It was through the use of dialogue that the woman in the garden got what she wanted, when caught "throwing" the master facilitator "under the bus" for "helping" her get what she wanted, not repenting but blaming someone else for her sin, Adam blaming not only the woman but also God for creating an unhealthy environment for him to live in. "It is all your fault. Look at this thing you created that led me astray. It is all your fault for creating an 'unhealthy' environment for me to live in." making stimulus-response his basis of reasoning, not doing what he was told. Your soul knows from being told (why you preach the Word of God, which is foolishness to the world), which requires discussion, with the Father having the final say. Your flesh knows by "sense experience," by stimulus-response, which requires dialogue, with you having the final say.

Age has nothing to do with it. You can be an 80 year old man behaving like a child, lusting after pleasure hating restraint or an 8 year old child behaving like a Father, knowing the difference between right from wrong, having been told, doing what is right. It is thus in the child's carnal nature to set aside (compromise) established commands, rules, facts, and truth in order to have or get what he wants, to get what he is lusting after making him vulnerable to being seduced, deceived, and manipulated by anyone offering to "help" him get what he wants.

James 1:14, 15 "But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death."

Romans 6:16 "Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?"

The law of righteousness is of the Father. The law of sin is of the flesh.

Romans 7:7 "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 3:20 ". . . for by the law is the knowledge of sin."

Romans 7:14-25 "For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin."

Hebrews 12:5-11: "And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him: For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby."

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 authority any questions they might have regarding His commands, rules, facts, and truth, providing He deems it necessary, has time, those under His authority are able to understand, and are not questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking 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 (or have been told), that is in order to do the Father's will, and 4) casting out (expels or grounds) those who question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack His authority, which retains the Father's authority system in the child's or man's thoughts, directly effecting his actions, resulting in the those under the Father's authority KNOWING right from wrong from being told (especially when it comes to behavior).

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

John 5:30 "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 12:47-50 "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."

Matthew 12:50 "For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother."

Matthew 7:21 "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 23:9 "And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven."

Ephesians 6:1-3 "Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honour thy father and mother; which is the first commandment with promise; That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth."

While dad (the "earthly father") is not perfect, he may be (or may have been) a down right tyrant (or MIA/AWOL)—as a child lusting after pleasure without restraint—his office of authority is perfect, having been given to him by God (the "Heavenly Father") who is perfect, in which to do His will. When it comes to establishing right and wrong behavior it is important that he discusses with his children any command, rule, fact, or truth they question, providing he deems it necessary, has time, they are able to understand, and are not questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking his authority. Without the discussion (where the Father holds himself accountable to the same commands, rules, facts, and truth as he holds the children, with the "earthly father" admitting he was wrong, when he was wrong) wrath can develop in the child (the pathway to Marxism).

When God created man He did something to him which he did with nothing else in the creation. He "breathed into his nostrils the breath of life." In doing so He made him a "living soul."

Genesis 2:7 "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."

He then required him to do something which He required of nothing else in the creation, He told him what was right and what was wrong behavior and the consequence for disobedience, requiring him to obey.

Genesis 2:16, 17 "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."

Only man can be told or tell others what is right and what is wrong behavior. Only man can read or write a book. Nothing else in the creation can read or write a book, nothing else in the creation be told or tell others what to say or do. All the rest of the creation is based upon stimulus-response—for all living organisms, created from the earth that is, approach pleasure and avoid pain, which is the nature of man's flesh, "formed of the dust of the ground."

2 Timothy 3:13 "But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived."

For those "of and for the world" if the law is from the Father and law defines man as sinful, by getting rid of the Father law is negated, 'liberating' man to become himself, only "of and for the world," as he was before the Father and His law came into his life.

György Lukács: "... the central problem is to change reality.… reality with its 'obedience to laws.'" (György Lukács, History and Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism?)

By using dialogue instead of discussion, when it comes to behavior, making the child's carnal nature, his lust for pleasure and hatred toward restraint the Thesis, "obedience to laws," that is the Father's authority is negated, allowing the child to become himself, making him subject to facilitator's of 'change,' to those who, as predators, charlatans, pimps, pedophiles, seduce, deceive, and manipulate him (as one of Thorndike's chickens, Skinner's rats, and Pavlov's dogs), turning him as "natural resource" into "human resource," resulting in him from then on following after, supporting, protecting, defending, praising, worshiping, and even willingly dying for them for 'justifying' his lusts, for making him like them, making him in their image, selling his soul to them for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world is stimulating, a world that is passing away with them casting him away when he no longer serves their purpose, no longer brings them pleasure, or gets in their way. Doing to him what he did to the Father for getting in his way.

The facilitators of 'change's' agenda is to seduce you into 'justifying' your carnal nature so he can do wrong, disobey, sin, that is so he can lust after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world is stimulating without being judged, condemned, or cast out, that is with your affirmation. 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, that is my lusts or get in my way 'the people' will remove (negate) you (since having 'justified' their lusts I now 'own' them). It appears I must keep an eye on you from now on for the 'good' of 'the people,' that is for my 'good.'" The facilitator of 'change' has to maintain a position of authority, even backing down for a period of time in order to "protect" his supporters, that is through the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process continue to initiate and sustain his "power base" in order for them to silence, censor, and cast out those of the discussion camp, who are 'loyal' to the Father's authority who might judge, condemn and cast him out if they regain control over "the people." If I can find out what you are lusting after (which, when it comes to behavior dialogue does) and, removing any fear of being judged, condemned, cast out offer to "help" you attain it, from then on I "own" you. It is all the serpent, the master facilitator of 'change' did in the garden in Eden with the woman—with Adam, following after her.

Irvin D. Yalom, in his book The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy wrote (I replace his use of client with children or students along with adding comments in order to make it clear what he is writing): "Without exception, [children] enter group therapy [the "group grade" classroom] with the history of a highly unsatisfactory experience in their first and most important group—their primary family [the traditional home with parents telling them what they can and cannot do]." "What better way to help [the child] recapture the past than to allow him to re-experience and reenact ancient feelings [resentment, hostility] toward parents in his current relationship to the therapist [that is in his current relationship with the facilitator of 'change]? The [facilitator of 'change'] is the living personification of all parental images [he takes the place of the parent]. Group [facilitators] refuse to fill the traditional authority role: they do not lead in the ordinary manner, they do not provide answers and solutions [that is teach right and wrong from established commands, rules, facts, and truth], they urge the group [the children] to explore and to employ its own resources [to dialogue their "feelings," that is their desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' in the "light" of the current situation, that is their desire for "the group's" approval (that is their affirmation)]. The group [that is the children] must feel free to confront the [the facilitator of 'change'], who must not only permit, but encourage, such confrontation [which is rebellion, anarchy, revolution]. He [the child] reenacts early family scripts in the group and, if therapy [brainwashing—washing respect for and fear of the father's authority from the child's brain (thoughts), which is correlated to Nationalism, which is the true meaning of brainwashing] is successful, is able to experiment with new behavior, to break free from the locked family role [free from having to submit himself to the father's authority, that is free from having to do the father's will] he once occupied. . . . [the child] changes the past by reconstituting it [by 'creating' a "new" world order from his "ought," that is a world which "lusts" without being judged, condemned, cast out, that is a world void of the father's authority and the guilty conscience which the father's authority engenders for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, that is for "lusting . . ."]."

Matthew 16:26 "For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?"

In other words what do you gain when you receive the approval of men and loose your soul, when there is nothing in the creation that can save you?

Galatians 1:10 The Apostle Paul: "Do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ."

1 John 2:18 "And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever."

Colossians 2:8 "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."

Ephesians 5:5-7 "Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. Be not ye therefore partakers with them."

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

Through the use of dialogue, when it comes to behavior, gaining access to what you are lusting after, what you covet (which you dialogue with your self about) and offering to "help" you turn it into reality, thus gaining your trust, the facilitator of 'change,' the psychotherapist is able to "own" you, buying and selling your soul for his own pleasure and gain.

Carl Rogers wrote: "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."

When there are questions by the children regarding the Father's established commands, rules, facts, and truth the Father requires discussion, where he has the final say. Children, basing their behavior upon approaching pleasure and avoiding pain, use dialogue, "I feel" and "I think," with them having the final say, making their thoughts subject to their feelings of the 'moment' that the world is stimulating. This is the spectrum from love to hate where we share our opinion from I love, I like, I have no opinion, I do not like, and I hate, which is based upon what stimulates pleasure or pain in the child in the 'moment,' pain for the child including his missing out on pleasure. The more the child lives in the world of dialogue within a world of increased restraint the more he moves from dissatisfaction, to resentment, to hate. This, those "of and for the world" depend upon.

Kenneth Benne: "Persons will not come into full partnership in the process until they register dissatisfaction." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)

As Karl Marx explained it, not until the moment of "Critical Criticism" where hatred towards the Father's authority becomes manifest can 'change' be initiated and sustained. This is the point where dialogue refuses to submit to discussion (having been moved from dissatisfaction, to resentment, to hatred) but insists upon having its way "No matter what happens to me." Since lust or immorality is common to all, Marx's logic is "What gives a person the right to fire someone else for being immoral on the job." It is in dialogue that immorality resides therefore, according to Karl Marx dialogue brought to its boiling point against restraint, what he called "Critical Criticism" must come to the aid of the individual and put into praxis removing the Father's authority from society, in defense of "humanity." This is why David Owen's son commented about his father's socialist project in America that all his father produced was a society of incompetent, lazy, and vicious people.

Karl Marx: "Not feeling at home in the sinful world, Critical Criticism 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)

Karl Marx: "Criticism is now simply a means. Indignation is its essential pathos, denunciation its principle task. Criticism is criticism in hand-to-hand combat" (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right)

This is why the child, "feelings" are the Thesis for those "of and for the world." Without it, they can not rule the world.

Georg Hegel: "The child, contrary to appearance, is the absolute, the rationality of the relationship; he is what is enduring and everlasting, the totality which produces itself once again as such." (Georg Hegel, System of Ethical Life)

Theodor Adorno: "The individual may have 'secret' thoughts which he will under no circumstances reveal to anyone else if he can help it. To gain access is particularly important, for here may lie the individual's potential." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)

By focusing upon the child's feelings when it comes to behavior, 'creating' a safe place, space, zone where he can share his feelings toward authority without being judged, condemned, being cast out negates the Father's authority is the child's thoughts, directly effecting his actions, that is 'justifies' his disobedience. This is what happened in a garden in Eden, where that which was "negative," "Thou shalt surely die" was replaced with that which was "positive," "Ye shalt not surely die."

Genesis 3:1-6: "Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? [this is a neurolinguistic construct (an imbedded statement in a question, sensitizing a person to their lusts, when it comes to right and wrong behavior, beginning the process of liberating a person's lust out from under their fear of judgment, that is out from under the father's authority, bring dialogue forward out from under the restraint of discussion)—which is one of the most powerful forms of hypnosis] And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it [she revealed her lust], lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die [removing the "negative," that is fear of judgment (which was not a lie regarding the here-and now, that is the tree itself did not kill her—or Adam—but a lie regarding the there-and then, with God removing her—and Adam—from having access to the "tree of life" for their disobedience, then, after death both coming to judgment, that is inheriting eternal life or eternal death; what died in the 'moment' was their soul, now subject to their flesh, no longer to God, needing salvation by an act of God in order to inherit eternal life)]: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods (which dialogue does, everyone is a god in dialogue), knowing good and evil [according to their carnal nature]. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise [evaluating (aufheben) from her senses, that is from her understanding she made her self the establisher of right and wrong behavior], she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat." Genesis 3:1-6

It is the guilty conscience, which is engendered from the Father's authority that, according to the globalists has to be negated if society is to be 'liberated' from the effect which the Father's authority has upon it.

Kurt Lewin, in his book A Dynamic Theory of Personality (explaining in two sentences how the guilty conscience is 'created' and how to destroy it) wrote: "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 (that is, if the adult goes away or loses his authority) the negative valence also disappears."

By 'creating' and environment where children can share their lusts and hatred toward restraint without fear of being judged, condemned, cast out, working on a project together as they build relationship negates the guilty conscience, replacing "What the father says" with the "super-ego," with "What 'the group' thinks."

Carl Rogers wrote: "Prior to therapy the person is prone to ask himself, 'What would my parents want me to do?" During the process of therapy the individual comes to ask himself, 'What does it mean to me?'" Psychotherapy is simply moving communication from discussion, from "What would my parent's want me to do?" to dialogue, to "What does it mean to me?" It is simply that which took place in a garden in Eden, where therapy replaced doing God the Father's will, as recorded in Genesis 3:1-6, the first therapy session.

Norman Brown: "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:'" (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)

Dr. Robert Trojanowicz: "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)

While the guilty conscience ties the child to the Father or rather the Father to the child the "super-ego" ties the child to society. The Father's authority and the guilty conscience which it engenders demands no compromise. The "super-ego" demands compromise in order for man to build relationship with one another. In Benjamin Bloom's book, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain (by which all teachers are certified and schools accredited) he wrote: "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."

Making the child's feelings the focus of attention, the Thesis 'changes' the world.

Karl Marx built his ideology upon the ideology of Heraclitus who wrote: "Every grown man of the Ephesians should hang himself and leave the city to the boys."

Karl Marx, in Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right' wrote: "The justice of state constitutions is to be decided not on the basis of Christianity, not from the nature of Christian society but from the nature of human society."

Stoicism is built upon the ideology of Heraclitus. America was 'changed' when our highest court replaced the principles of Christianity, man doing the Father's will, which is related to "Common Law," with the principle of Heraclitus, with the children doing their will instead. In Strauss Vs. Strauss, 1941 our Supreme court wrote: "Every system of law known to civilized society generated from or had as its component one of two well-known systems of ethics, stoic or Christian [either men's opinions or the "rule of law"]. The COMMON LAW draws its subsistence from the latter, its roots go deep into that system, the Christian concept of right and wrong or right and justice motivates every rule of equity. It is the guide by which we dissolve domestic frictions and the rule by which all legal controversies are settled." In ROE v. WADE, 1973 our highest court (rejecting and therefore in defiance to the Christian faith) turned to stoicism (men's feelings of the ''moment') in making law: "there has always been strong support for the view that life does not begin until live birth. This was the belief of the Stoics." In ROE V. WADE our highest court embraced the ideology of Karl Marx, establishing man's carnal nature over and therefore against the Word of God, that is Godly restraint, that is individualism, under God, that is "rule of law," which protects the individual from governmental usurpation of his God given rights. While in the French Revolution and all socialist revolutions since the King was removed. America retained the King, placing him in the home, with the father as a King over his family, property, and business, raising up his children to know right from wrong from being told, creating a guilty conscience in the next generation of citizens when they did wrong, disobeyed, or sinned. that they might serve the citizens, respecting their right of conviction, private property, and private business, under God. This is the reason 'liberals' hate the "Bill of Rights," using the Highest Court to make law in order to 'change' it.

George Washington warned us of such activity. In his Farewell Address he commented that "despotism ... predominates in the human heart." He warned us: "If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation [I add for clarity, since it has taken place by one branch of government usurping authority over another, such as the Supreme Court making law., he continued]; for, though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed."

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

The Father's authority is based upon discussion. The child's carnal nature upon dialogue. By making education subject to dialogue the students are 'liberated' from their Father's authority, finding their identity in one another instead.

If you make children the Thesis, the Father becomes the Antithesis, paving the way to synthesis, where children can become at-one-with one another by finding their identity in what they have in common, their carnal nature, that is their natural inclination to lust after pleasure and hate restraint.

Ervin Laszlo: "Bypassing the traditional channels of 'top-down' decision making our objective center's upon transforming 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)

Max Horkheimer: "The family is one of these social forms which ... cannot be changed without change in the total social framework." (Max Horkheimer, Kritische Theori)

When it comes to defining and establishing behavior when you insist upon dialogue, the Father's authority is negated, allowing all children to become united as one, overthrowing the Father and His authority. This is the "be positive not negative," you will not be judged, condemned, cast out for sharing your opinion, open-ended, non-directed classroom experience of two "children" in a garden called Eden, where the master facilitator of 'change' helped them 'liberate' their self from the Father's authority so they could do what they wanted without someone telling them what the could and could not do.

That is how it is done.

In the 50's education changed from the teaching of facts and truth (discussion) to the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process, through the use of what are called "Bloom's Taxonomies" replacing the Father's authority in the classroom with the child's carnal nature, damning the souls of the children, destroying the nation. See "A Curse Upon America."

Jürgen Habermas: "If the 'restoring of life' of the world is to be conceived in terms of the Christian revelation, then Marx must collapse into a bottomless abyss." (Jürgen Habermas, Theory and Practice)

Marxists know of God's judgment upon them for their sins but seek to remove His Word from the environment so they can do wrong, disobey, sin, that is so they can lust without having any sense of guilt, with "the people's" affirmation.

"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." Romans 1:32 (See Romans 1:21-31)

2 Thessalonians 2:11, 12 with "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

Because men, as "children of disobedience," 'justify' their "self," that is 'justify' their lusting after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates, establishing lust over and therefore against the Father's authority, "God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie," that "enjoying the present" is the standard for "good" instead of doing the Father's will, "That they all might be damned who believed not the truth" that is believed not in the Father and in His Son, Jesus Christ, "but had pleasure in unrighteousness," that is in their "self" and the pleasures of the 'moment,' that the world stimulates.

Romans 1:28-32 "And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them."

1 John 2:22 "He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son" for whom the lake of fire, which is never quenched is prepared to receive, who make their carnal nature, lust for pleasure the Thesis instead of doing the Father's will.

Revelation 10:15 "And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire."

There is a consequence to your using dialogue, your opinion, with you having the final say when it comes to behavior instead of using discussion, what the Father says, with Him having the final say. It is a subtle 'change' that has major (eternal) ramifications. While discussion, as the law can not save you it reveals to us we need a savior, one to pay the price for our sins, to pay for our disobedience that apart from Him, not having faith in Him we have not hope for eternal life, only facing eternal death for being a fraud, for acting like we are god, which when we make behavior subject to dialogue we become.

Galatians 2:16, 20, 21 "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain."

Ephesians 2:8, 9 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."

Hebrews 11:6 "But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him."

Romans 10:17 "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."

God's Word condemns Heraclitus (who was from Ephesus, where the Apostle Paul preached) and all the wisdom of men, who, through establishing their self over and therefore against the Word of God, damn their soul and the souls of all who listen to and follow them.

Matthew 4:4 "But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." Where God, the Father has the final say.