Diaprax:
by
Dean Gotcher
In a "win-win" world, i.e., in a world based upon everyone's "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., their carnal (natural) desires, i.e., their "sensuous needs" ("felt needs") of the 'moment,' as well as their dissatisfaction, i.e., resentment or hatred toward anyone or anything they perceive, i.e., "sense perceive" as inhibiting or blocking them from satisfying or fulfilling them)—with "positive" being their enjoying (or have the potential of enjoying) the carnal (natural) pleasures of the 'moment' they desire (indicative of the child's carnal nature), with the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' being "good" i.e., making them '''feel' good," with anything or anyone in the environment stimulating and/or affirming their carnal (natural) desires of the 'moment' therefore being "good" ("positive" = "pleasure" = "good"; ∴ "environment stimulating, i.e., initiating and sustaining pleasure, including the pleasure which comes from being approved, i.e., affirmed" = "positive" = "good") and "negative" being their missing out on the carnal (natural) pleasures of the 'moment' and/or being reproved, corrected, rebuked, i.e., chastened for participating or attempting to participate in them, i.e., for doing wrong, with anyone chastening them (indicative of the father's/Father's authority system), i.e., preventing, i.e., inhibiting or blocking them from enjoying the carnal (natural) pleasures of the 'moment' being "bad", i.e., making them "feel" bad ("negative" = "pain, including the pain which comes with missing out on pleasure as well as the pain which comes with being rejected" = "bad"; ∴ "environment inhibiting or blocking pleasure" = "negative" = "bad")—truth—which is often "negative," i.e., reproving, correcting, rebuking, i.e., chastening, i.e., inhibiting or blocking the carnal (natural) pleasures (desires) of the 'moment,' i.e., that which is "positive," i.e., that which is "good" in order to "do right and not wrong" according to an authority figure's commands, rules, facts, and truth instead (engendering a "lose-lose" condition or environment where they 1. can not enjoy the carnal—natural—pleasure of the 'moment' they desire, i.e., what they want, when they want it in order to "do right and not wrong" according to an authority figures commands, rules, facts, and truth instead, being chastened if and when they, attempting to enjoy or enjoying the pleasures of the 'moment,' disobey authority and 2. are rejected, i.e., cast out if they do enjoy or attempt to enjoy the pleasures of the 'moment,' in defiance to authority)—becomes "bad"—since the truth (doing right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., doing the father's/Father's will—righteousness) not only "represses" them, preventing, i.e., inhibiting or blocking them from having it "their way," i.e., enjoying the carnal (natural) pleasures of the 'moment,' i.e., "feeling 'good'" about their "self," i.e., being "positive" but it also "alienates" them from others, if they preach or teach the truth to them (insisting everyone else do right and not wrong according to their father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth as well), with others rejecting them since they do not want to hear or know the truth themselves, since it inhibits or blocks them from having it "their way," i.e., enjoying the carnal (natural) pleasures of the 'moment' they desire i.e., preventing them from "feeling 'good'" about their "self," i.e., being "positive" as well. "Win-win" thus means not only does the person 1. get to or hope to get to enjoy the carnal (natural) pleasures of the 'moment' that they desire but they also 2. receive the approval, i.e., "affirmation" of others in doing so, affirming their enjoying the carnal (natural) pleasures of the 'moment' they desire as well—engendering a sensation of "oneness" ("peace," i.e., a "feeling" of wellness, i.e., wholeness, i.e., belongingness, i.e., completeness, i.e., "purposiveness," i.e., "lawfulness"—where laws are established to serve and protect the child's carnal nature, i.e., his "self interest," i.e., man's and woman's carnal—natural—pleasures of the 'moment,' i.e., "human nature" over and therefore against the fathers'/Father's authority, i.e., any authority, i.e. law that restrains, i.e., "represses" them and "alienates" them from others) in all participants, called consensus, with those of and for the father's/Father's authority system, i.e., those inhibiting or blocking the consensus 'moment' (the sensation of "oneness" with "self" and others) becoming labeled, i.e., categorized, i.e., taxonomized, i.e., graded as being "negative," i.e., divisive, hateful, intolerant, prejudiced, maladjusted, a lower order thinker, a resister to 'change,' in denial, etc., i.e., not being a "team player," i.e., not being "positive." The moment an environment is "win-win," i.e., classified as being either "positive" or "negative," the father's/Father's authority system, i.e., "right and wrong" (which are established by authority), i.e., the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth are under attack by "the children of disobedience," 'liberating' themselves from the father's/Father's authority system, so that they can do wrong, i.e., do what they want to do, when the want to do it without having a "guilty conscience," i.e., so they sin with impunity.
The only way to unite a class of twenty students, divided amongst themselves upon their fathers authority—their fathers commands, rules, facts, and truth differing from one another—is to 'liberate them from the father's/Father's authority. By uniting them upon what they have in common, i.e., their desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' and their dissatisfaction with the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth which restrains them, i.e., which inhibits and blocks them from enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' they desire, not only are the children 'changed,' i.e., the world is 'changed' as well. In this way, not only does the individual child "win," all the children in the class (of the world) "win" as well.
The truth no only becomes "irrational" in a "win-win" environment, it becomes "irrelevant" as well, the carnal desires of the 'moment' determining right from wrong instead, wrong being anyone inhibiting or blocking anyone else from enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment.' A room full of "right's," united as one upon enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment,' 'justifies' to its "self" the right to negate any right which stands in its way. In a "win-win" world therefore, "human rights" (collectivism, i.e., the children united as one, in consensus) negates (disregards, i.e., considers as irrational and therefore irrelevant) inalienable rights (individualism, under God, i.e., the father's/Father's authority system)—"the group's" "feelings" of the 'moment' (that which is "positive") outweighing any right (authority, i.e., command, rule, fact, or truth, i.e., that which is "negative") that stands in its way. In this way of thinking, i.e., when the father's/Father's authority system is negated in the children's thoughts and actions, "children of disobedience" simply become children being themselves, i.e., "doing their own thing," i.e., being "normal," 'justifying' themselves in their unrighteous thoughts and unrighteous actions, 'justifying' their negation of the children of obedience, i.e., the righteous and the innocent, when they get in their way. The scriptures warn us of this 'logic, i.e., of this way of thinking and acting. "Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked." Exodus 23:7 This speaks volumes to what has happened, and is happening in America today.
If you start with the child, evaluating the world from his or her nature ("feelings," i.e., loving pleasure and hating restraint, i.e., the child's desire and/or dissatisfaction of the 'moment,' i.e., sensuousness) the father's/Father's authority system is negated. If you start with the father's/Father's authority (doing right and not wrong, i.e., obedience, i.e., righteousness) the child's nature is restrained, the child having to respond to (obey) the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth in faith instead of responding according to his own understanding, based upon his own "feelings," i.e., desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment.' If you attempt to merge the two, i.e., the father's/Father's authority system with the child's nature, you simply (subtly) "convert" the father's/Father's authority system into the child's nature, making the father's/Father's authority system (right-wrong) subject to the child's nature (approaching pleasure and avoiding pain), i.e., "of and for self," deceitfully negating the father's/Father's authority system (where the father/Father loves the children, but hates, not them, but it when they do wrong—chastening them that they might learn to do right) in the process. Your silence, i.e., your refusal to reprove, correct, rebuke the unrighteous for their unrighteous (deceitful and wicked) thoughts and actions (refusing to present the father's/Father's authority system, i.e., doing right and not wrong when they are doing wrong), because you desire their approval, i.e., affirmation (because you want to be at one with the children, i.e., participate in their "fun and games"), 'justifies' to them that their unrighteous (deceitful and wicked) thoughts and actions are "good," making you as guilty as them for their wicked ways.
Being a "team player," believe it or not, is the hallmark of "common-ism" AKA Communism. Most people think the "Berlin wall" came down because Communism was defeated. In truth it came down because Communism had succeeded. Instead of fighting against Capitalism, i.e., individualism, under authority (parent, boss, leadership, God), requiring "self control/self discipline/humbling and denying of self in order (as in "old" world order) to do right and not wrong, with authority demanding that everyone obey them, i.e., do what they command and accept what they teach, as is, by faith," as traditional Communist did (becoming "authoritarian" themselves by doing so), Communism, in its transformational form, i.e., through the use of "group psychotherapy," incorporated "self interest" instead—thereby creating a so called "new" world order where everyone is subject to "community development," i.e., to society, i.e., to "building relationship" instead of to an authority figure, "out of touch" with the children's ("the people's") carnal desires of the 'moment,' insisting they do things their way (or God's way) or else.
By 'shifting' communication from the preaching and teaching of commands, rules, facts, and truth (to be accepted as is, by faith), restraining "human nature" to the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus (in facilitated, i.e., "group psychotherapy" meetings), affirming "human nature," i.e., 'liberating' "human nature,' making everyone "equal," according to "human nature," working together as one, i.e., as a "team," serving and protecting "human nature," the deed, i.e., 'change' in how "the people" thought and acted ("theory and practice"), i.e., related with themselves, others, and the world around them (as well as responded to authority) was achieved (without the use of outright physical force, the force of affirmation and the fear of rejection, i.e., group dynamics having taken its place). In this way "theory-practice" unity (synthesis, i.e., consensus, i.e., "human nature") negates "belief-action" dichotomy (antitheses, i.e., belief which divides, i.e., commands, rules, facts, and truth which conflict with "human nature," impeding the natural impulses and urges of the 'moment').
If you do not suspend the truth, i.e., if you are not willing to put truth on a cross for the sake of "group approval," i.e., affirmation (consensus) in the "group meeting," "the group" will reject, censor, and (if necessary, i.e., if you persist on holding onto, preaching, and teaching the truth) crucify you. "Few individuals, as Asch has shown, can maintain their objectivity [their belief, i.e., their faith (trust) in authority, be it in their parent's, their teacher's, their boss's, their leader(s), or God's authority] in the face of apparent group unanimity." (Irvin D. Yalom, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy) "It is usually easier to change individuals formed into a group than to change any one of them separately [the pressure of group approval, i.e., the desire for affirmation overpowering the individuals ability to hold to the truth, i.e., to stand alone]." "The individual accepts the new system of values and beliefs [that 'truth' is found in "self" finding oneness with the carnal 'moment,' with "the group's" approval, i.e., affirmation, making 'truth' ever subject to 'change,' i.e., no longer subject to some authority figure, establishing it for all times and in all places; "We recognize the point of view that truth and knowledge are only relative and that there are no hard and fast truths which exist for all time and places." (Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain, p. 32)—book one of two books referred to as "Bloom's Taxonomies" which are foundational for teacher "certification" and school "accreditation" today)] by accepting belongingness to the group." (Kurt Lewin, in Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change) "One of the most fascinating aspects of group therapy is that everyone is born again, born together in the group." (Yalom)
If the carnal (natural) pleasures of the 'moment,' including the carnal (natural) pleasure which comes with being affirmed by others—affirming you or rather affirming what you and they both have in common, i.e., approaching pleasure and avoiding pain, with you and them both desiring (approaching) the carnal pleasures of the 'moment,' while also resenting (avoiding) anyone who inhibits or blocks you, themselves, or anyone else from enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment,' including the carnal pleasure which comes with being affirmed (for desiring the carnal pleasure of the 'moment')—becomes the standard for "good" ("positive"), then anyone inhibiting or blocking (therefore not affirming) the carnal (natural) pleasures of the 'moment,' inhibiting or blocking you, themselves, or anyone else from enjoying the carnal (natural) pleasures of the 'moment'—requiring everyone to humble, deny, control, or discipline their "self," i.e., to set aside enjoying the carnal/natural pleasures of the 'moment' in order to do what is right and not wrong, according to their or someone else's established commands, rules, facts, and truth, requiring faith (since they are not "of and for" the carnal/natural pleasures of the 'moment' you desire, i.e., not "of and for self")—becomes "bad" ("negative"). "Win-win" therefore means not only do I "win-win," being able to not only enjoy the carnal (natural) pleasures of the 'moment' I desire but also receive your approval (affirmation) in doing so as well, but you also "win-win," being able to not only enjoy the carnal (natural) pleasures of the 'moment' you desire but also receive my approval (affirmation) in doing so as well, also. "Win-win" therefore means we both "win-win," being able to not only enjoy the carnal (natural) pleasures of the 'moment,' which we both desire in the 'moment' (with no sense of "guilty," i.e., judgment, condemnation, put down, "prejudice," etc.) but we also get to enjoy the pleasure which comes with affirmation, with us affirming one another, becoming at-one-with, i.e., in consensus with our "self," i.e., our carnal nature, i.e., "human nature," one another, and the world which stimulates our natural desires, i.e., our "lusts" for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment.' Since truth requires you to humble/deny/control/discipline your "self," i.e., your carnal desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' in order to hear and receive it, if you make "self," i.e., your carnal desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' the foundation of life, you will never be able to hear and receive the truth.
If you follow this 'logic' (if pleasure/affirmation = "good"/"positive" then establishing doing right and not wrong over pleasure, inhibiting/blocking pleasure/affirmation = "bad"/"negative") then "feeling bad," i.e., having a guilty conscience for doing wrong, as well as making others "feel bad" (preaching and teaching "right-wrong" to them), developing a guilty conscience in them for doing wrong is "bad." Therefore removing "bad feelings," i.e., "negativity," i.e., negating your having a guilty conscience for doing wrong—thus not telling others (preaching to and teaching them) that what they are doing is wrong, thereby developing a guilty conscience in them for doing wrong—focusing upon everyone's "feelings," i.e., focusing upon everyone's personal desires of the 'moment' (their desire for pleasure and affirmation) and dissatisfactions (with missing out on the pleasures of the 'moment' in order to do right and not wrong as well as being rejected by others they desire to relate with, who are doing wrong, i.e., what they desire), i.e., replacing the guilty conscience (which is based upon doing right and not wrong, i.e., reasoning from commands, rules, facts, and truth which are given by authority and accepted as is, by faith) with the "super-ego" (which incorporates everyone's "feelings" of the 'moment' instead, i.e., reasoning from everyone's "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., their "sensuous needs" and "sense perception" of the 'moment,' i.e., reasoning from "sense experience," i.e., from everyone's carnal/natural desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment,' only, instead) is "good." (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3) The switch is from feeling good for doing things "right and not wrong" to "feeling good" itself instead, with you enjoying (or thinking about enjoying) the carnal (natural) pleasures of the 'moment,' being affirmed by others, affirming your carnal "feelings," "thoughts," and "actions" of the 'moment' which makes them "feel good" in the 'moment,' and visa versa—the "feeling" of affirmation (consensus) from then on becoming the sensation strived for—controlling (possessing) the persons thoughts and actions from then on. "The philosophers have only interpreted the world in different ways [have come up with what they think is right and wrong behavior], the objective however, is change [everyone identifying their common "feelings," i.e., "self interests," i.e., desires and dissatisfaction of the 'moment,' and in consensus, i.e., affirming one another, putting their carnal nature into social (collective) action (affirmative action), called praxis]." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #11)
This is the praxis (or social action) of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., 'reasoning' based upon dialogue, i.e., 'reasoning' from your "feelings," i.e., your "perception" of the 'moment,' 'justifying' your "self", establishing your carnal (natural) desires over and therefore against that which gets in the way of "feeling good," i.e., negating that which is "negative"—called the "negation of negation," i.e., replacing "freedom of the conscience" with "freedom from the conscience." It is impossible to please God without faith. It is impossible to have (or keep your) faith in God and praxis dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "self" 'justification.' The two paradigms, i.e., ways of thinking and acting are antithetical to one another. In the garden in Eden, for example, the woman's "sensuous need" to "touch the tree," and her "sense perception" that there was nothing wrong with it, i.e., that it was just like all the other trees in the garden, i.e., "good for food" and "pleasing to the eyes," 'justified' to her "self" that to eat of it (satisfying her carnal desires of the 'moment,' i.e., her "lust" of the flesh and eyes) was natural, i.e., rational ("positive"), making her independent of authority, i.e., 'liberating' her from "negativity." Her ability to think for her "self," i.e., to 'justify' her "self," i.e., to 'reason' 'dialectically,' i.e., to "Reason" from her carnal nature, i.e., according to her carnal "feelings" (desires and dissatisfactions, i.e., perception) of the 'moment' ("aufheben") and not from faith in established commands, rules, facts, and truth thus became her means to determining what was good and what was evil. Adam affirmed her 'reasoning' ability by joining her, "building relationship" with her in the praxis (social action) of "self" 'justification', i.e., "building relationship" with her upon common "self" 'interest,' i.e., that which he and she had in common, i.e., their carnal desire for the pleasures of the 'moment' and their dissatisfaction with restraint—Genesis 3:1-6.
Following this 'reasoning,' i.e., dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "self" 'justification,' i.e., "higher order thinking skills" in morals and ethics, if the 'drive' of life is to be "positive," i.e., is to enjoy the carnal pleasures of the 'moment,' and the 'purpose' of life is to create a world of "positivity," with everyone affirming ("building relationship" upon) everyone else's desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment,' i.e., "feeling good" about their "self," then truth must be silenced ("converted," i.e., transformed from being "right and not wrong" to being subject to everyone's "feelings" of the 'moment') for the sake of everyone's desire for and fulfillment of their carnal desires of the 'moment,' i.e., "feeling good" about themselves (their "self"—with "self" being "esteemed"), 'creating' a "new" world order of "worldly peace and socialist harmony," where everyone is working together as "one," in consensus—experiencing a "feeling" of "oneness"—initiating and sustaining (affirming) a world 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority system (Hebrews 12:5-11), i.e., a world where everyone is 'liberated' from having a guilty conscience, i.e., "feeling bad" for doing wrong (for disobeying the father/Father, needing to repent and be forgiven Romans 7:14-25), thereby engendering a world of unrighteousness and abomination (where everyone can sin with impunity, i.e., can be "of and for self," i.e., carnal, i.e., "of and for" the world only with no fear of judgment), making "human nature," i.e., the child's/man's carnal desires of the 'moment,' i.e., everyone's carnal "feelings," i.e., everyone's desire for the carnal pleasure of the 'moment' and their dissatisfaction with, resentment toward, and/or hatred against restraint and the restrainer (the truth), i.e., the Karl Marx in you, the law of the land. When you, 'justifying' your "self," make your "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., your desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' the truth, i.e., "equal" with the truth, you establish them above the truth, turning you against the truth in your effort to sustain them.
A "win-win" world is a world of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., a world of "self-social" 'justification," where children/men and women turn that which is good, i.e., doing right and not wrong according to the Father's will, i.e., doing the Father's will (righteousness) into evil, and evil, satisfying their carnal desires of the 'moment' (sensuousness) over and therefore against doing the Father's will into good. It is a world where children/men and women, using "human 'reasoning,'" i.e., their own "feelings" (carnal desires and dissatisfactions) of the 'moment' in order to determine right from wrong (instead of the Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth), 'create' a so called "new" world order made in their own image, i.e., a world of unrighteousness and abomination, where they can sin with impunity, i.e., where they can do wrong without having a "guilty conscience," i.e., where doing the Father's will no longer enters their thoughts and directs their actions. Replacing the preaching, teaching, and discussing of facts and truth (keeping authority in place) with the dialoguing of opinions, in order to arrive at a consensus, i.e., a "feeling" of "oneness" (making all "equal") accomplishes the deed.
The level of guilt (from resistance to 'change' [with a clear conscience—not having done wrong, enduring rejection], through tolerance of 'change' [with a guilty conscience—thinking about doing wrong, desiring approval from those doing wrong], to participating in and promoting 'change' [with no guilty conscience for doing wrong—wrong no longer being "rational," i.e., "relevant," i.e., being affirmed by and affirming others doing wrong]) a child/man or woman is having in an environment of sin, i.e., in and environment where "human nature" is the "norm," i.e., in an environment of 'change' (in the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, "group grade" classroom) is an indicator of how far he (or she) has traveled down the dialectic pathway of "self-social" 'justification,' i.e., of 'change.' The more guilt he has for sinning or for doing wrong (or being around those who are), i.e., the more he resists the process of 'change,' i.e., "self-social" 'justification,' i.e., the more he holds onto denying, humbling, controlling, disciplining his "self," i.e., obeying authority, i.e., doing the father's/Father's will instead of doing his "own thing," the less he has traveled down the dialectic pathway of 'change,' i.e., of "self-social" 'justification.' The less guilty he has for sinning or for doing wrong, i.e., the more he participates in the process of 'change,' i.e., in "self-social" 'justification' the farther he has traveled down the dialectic pathway of 'change,' i.e., of "self-social" 'justification.'
This is the grading system of the contemporary "group grade" classroom, preparing the next generation of leaders and followers, i.e., managers, i.e., facilitators of 'change' and workers to support the system of 'change'—with everyone thinking like Karl Marx. Karl Marx wrote: "Not feeling at home in the sinful world [where children, doing the father's/Father's will, can not fit in with, i.e., "feel good" in the world of sin], Critical Criticism [children learning to use dialectic 'reasoning' to 'justify' their "self," i.e., to 'justify' their carnal desires ("feelings") of the 'moment,' i.e., their "impulses and urges" of the 'moment' (mimosas), i.e. using "higher order thinking skills" in morals and ethics to determine right from wrong instead of obeying established commands, rules, facts, and truth by faith] must set up a sinful world in its own home [make sensuousness , i.e. their "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., their "sensuous needs" and "sense perception" of the 'moment' the "drive" and "purpose" of life, even in the home]." "Critical Criticism [dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., children 'justifying' their "self," questioning, challenging, defying parental authority] is a spiritualistic lord, pure spontaneity, actus purus, intolerant of any influence from without [intolerant of the father's/Father's "top-down," "do right and not wrong, as I command" authority system]." (Karl Marx, The Holy Family)
As Karl Marx explained it: "The justice of state constitutions is to be decided not on the basis of Christianity, not from the nature of Christian society [based upon the father's/Father's authority system, doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth , i.e., doing the father's/Father's will] but from the nature of human society [from the child's carnal nature, i.e., approaching pleasure and avoiding pain, i.e., living for the pleasures of the 'moment,' i.e., from "human nature" only]." "Laws must not fetter human life; but yield to it; they must change as the needs and capacities of the people change." "To enjoy the present reconciles us to the actual ." "The only practically possible emancipation [from the father's/Father's "top-down," "do right and not wrong" authority system] is the unique theory which holds that man [the child] is the supreme being for man." "Only within a social context [questioning, challenging, disregarding, defying, etc., the father's/Father's authority in order to be at-one-with (fit in with) others who deviate from or reject the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth] individual man is able to realize his own potential as a rational being." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right') "The essence of man is not an abstraction inherent in each particular individual [having an eternal soul, making him subject to God, i.e., to the Father's authority, establishing him, i.e., his "self," against his own nature and society, i.e., the "here-and-now"]." "The real nature of man is the totality of social relations [of "human nature," i.e., of the child's/man's and woman's carnal nature only]." (Karl Marx, Thesis on Feuerbach # 6) "Once the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the holy family, the former [the traditional family structure with the father/husband ruling over the home, restraining the children and their mother, i.e., his wife, i.e., "repressing" "human nature," "alienating" his wife and children from their own nature and society] must itself be annihilated [vernichtet] theoretically and practically [in "theory and practice," i.e., in the child's/man's/woman's thoughts (reasoning) and in his/her behavior (actions)]." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #4)
'Liberating' "the real nature of man" (the child/man/woman) from the laws which "fetter" it (from the father's/Father's authority), "as the needs and capacities of the people change" (as the child's/man's/woman's desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' 'change') requires meetings, lots of meetings, i.e., the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus meetings, i.e., the "How do/did you 'feel?'" and "What do/did you 'think?'" (not "What do you "know?") type meetings, where participants, roleplaying (according to their perception of) the "felt needs" of those who are not present, i.e., "the people," make laws which are ever 'changing,' i.e., subject to the 'changing' constellation of those present in the meeting—often hand picked according to the facilitator of 'changes' perception of what "the peoples" "felt needs" "ought" to be (collected by polls, surveys, and feasibility studies on the children's/people's level of "happiness" in the home, in the school, in the workplace, in the community, in the "church," etc.,)—with the outcome of the meeting being based upon everyone's "feelings," i.e., desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment,' progressively moving policy (laws) toward "the communities needs," i.e., "the peoples needs" of the 'moment,' i.e., which are ever 'changing,' and not upon established commands, rules, facts, and truths of the "past," i.e., individualism, under God, i.e., "authoritarianism," preventing or inhibiting 'change.' This (the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, transcending local control) makes laws readily adaptable to 'change,' i.e., transitory, i.e., unpredictable—since the rules of procedure are decided at each meeting by the participants (replacing or mingling Robert's Rules of Order, i.e., persuasion based upon commands, rules, facts, and truth of the "past," i.e., learned in the "past," with the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, i.e., with everyone's "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., the soviet method for establishing law) resulting in policies becoming subject to the "self interest" of those present in the meeting, "representing" (in their perception, i.e., according to their "self interest" of the 'moment'—which is not true representation) the "felt needs" ("self interest") of "the people," i.e., "the state." History has taught us: "Jurisprudence of terror takes two forms; loosely defined rules which produces unpredictable law, and spontaneous changes in rules to best suit the state." (R. W. Makepeace and Croom Helm, Marxist Ideology and Soviet Criminal Law) But who pays attention to the lessons of history these days.
Without negating the father's/Father's authority system, i.e., removing "negativity" from communication, the "children of disobedience," i.e., the facilitators of 'change' can not have it their way, living for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' in this life, seducing, deceiving, manipulating all who affirm them, into coming their way, i.e., making them "feel 'good'" in the 'moment,' i.e. not "feel bad"—having a guilty conscience for doing wrong in the process. "Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience." Ephesians 2:2, 3; 5:6 "Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others." Ephesians 2:2, 3
It is impossible to communicate the truth to a culture of children, including those in adult bodies, who 'reason' through their "feelings" of the 'moment,' since they lose interest in what you are telling them the 'moment' they realize they are not getting or might not get any pleasure out of it, including affirmation for their "self," in the 'moment'—"Make me 'feel good' and I will listen to you." Focusing upon the nature of children, i.e., their carnal desires ("self interest") of the 'moment,' facilitators of 'change', i.e., psychotherapists, i.e., seducers, deceivers, and manipulators of children/men and women are able wash their brain of the father/Father's authority system, using them then for their own pleasure and gain. Thinking they are "free" to do whatever they want to do, when they want to do it, i.e., without fear of judgment (accountability to their parents, i.e., their father, to their teacher, ,,, to God, i.e., the Father) for their thoughts and actions ("theory and practice"), the issue of freedom never enters the children's mind, as they, like "natural resource," are being manipulated and used by the facilitator of 'change's,' i.e., the psychotherapist's, i.e., the seducer, deceiver, and manipulator of children/men and women, for his own pleasure and gain.
By insisting upon a "positive" ("feelings" based) environment (while making decisions), truth is sacrificed upon the "alter" of men's opinions, making truth ever subject to 'change,' i.e., ever subject to everybody's "feelings" of the 'moment,' the situation or environment of the 'moment' which is stimulating them, and whoever happens to be manipulating the situation or the environment of the 'moment.' By insisting upon everyone being "positive" and not "negative," the facilitator of 'change,' i.e., the psychotherapist, i.e., the manipulator of the environment is able to seduce and deceive everyone into working together as "one," in consensus affirming and supporting him and his desired outcome, i.e., the satisfaction of his own personal pleasures and gain, i.e., fulfilling his own "self interests" without accountability for whatever happens to them in the end. In other words, preaching, teaching, and discussing the truth, i.e., trying to persuade people of the truth is antithetical, i.e., is "lose-lose" in a world where everyone is dialoging their opinions or theories, i.e., their "feelings" (desires and dissatisfactions) of the 'moment' to a consensus—where everyone is uniting with one another upon "feelings," i.e., upon their desires and dissatisfactions ("self interests") of the 'moment'—making you (and the truth) irrational and therefore irrelevant in their eyes, i.e., in a world of 'change.' In truth it is win-win for anyone holding onto the truth in a "win-win" world, i.e., denying their "self" daily, picking up their cross, i.e., enduring the rejection of men, receiving eternal life, walking in the Holy Spirit (knowing the joy and the peace of the Lord, which the world can not know and therefore in their ignorance fight against), having fellowship with the Father, and with his son, Jesus Christ, along with all who fellowship with them.
You can only preach and teach the truth, discussing it with others in order to persuade (convince) them, i.e., in order to get them to accept it as "is" (the "old school," i.e., traditional method of education). To dialogue truth with others, making it subject to your and their "feelings" (perception) of the 'moment,' is to turn it into an opinion, making it (and you) equal with that which only "seems to be" true in the 'moment,' thereby making it (and you) ever subject to 'change,' i.e., seducible, deceivable, and manipulatable—like natural resource. "Black is black and white is white. Neither torture, maltreatment nor intimidation can change a fact. To argue the point… serves no useful purpose."—P.O.W. Major David F. MacGhee responding to brainwashing attempts by the Communist North Korean's, who were trying to get him to replace a didactic "right-wrong," truth based paradigm, i.e., way of feeling, thinking, acting, and relation with others with a dialectical "opinion," i.e., "feelings" based paradigm, making truth ever subject to 'change.' (January 19th, 1953) If truth is ever subject to 'change,' i.e., to your "feelings" of the 'moment,' then any authority figure, be it parent, teacher, boss, or God who gets in the way of them, becomes irrational—making sovereignty, nationalism, etc., i.e., local control, i.e., "My family, property, business, country, etc., Not yours" (as God's "My garden. Not yours") irrelevant in the process, leaving all that "IS," "of and for self" in the end.
All "certified" teachers are trained to accept and apply in their classroom the Marxist "point of view that truth and knowledge are only relative and that there are no hard and fast truths which exist for all time and places." (Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain, p. 32) In other words: "truth and knowledge" are subject to our "feelings" ("sensuous needs" and "sense perception"—Karl Marx, MEGA I/3) of the 'moment' and our ability to interpret, 'justify,' and respond to them, not to some authority figure telling us what is true and what is not, i.e., what is right and what is wrong—with us having to accept truth as preached and taught by them, requiring us to have faith in them and their commands, rules, facts, and truth. Teachers are "certified" and schools "accredited" today (including "Christian") based upon their knowledge and use of what are called "Bloom's Taxonomies," which are based upon Marxist ideology. (Whoa! Going to far, to fast. Those "willed" to be ignorant, i.e., who "feel good" in their ignorance need read no farther, got quotes from Bloom and Marx to back me up though, for those who are willing to know, i.e., who are not "fearful" of knowing the truth). While Karl Marx, unlike Bloom, advocated the use of outright physical force (Bloom's force being the pressure of "group approval," i.e., affirmation, i.e., the fear of being rejected by "the group," "group dynamics"—Kurt Lewin, Resolving social conflicts: Selected papers on group dynamics, although according to Abraham Maslow Bloom's method of 'change' "is politics & is in time and space & will take a long time & cost much blood." Abraham Maslow, The Journals of A.H. Maslow, Volumes I and II), they both had the same "ideal," that truth is based upon a persons "feelings" of the 'moment' ("sense experience"—Karl Marx, MEGA I/3) and not upon "right and wrong," i.e., commands and rules, facts and truth established once and for all by some authority figure, be it teacher, parent, boss, and/or God, which everyone has to accept as "is," by faith because someone in authority proclaimed "Because I said so," "It is written," "I AM, that I AM" when they questioned them/it, i.e., asked them "Why?" (for their opinion) when they/it (the truth) got in the way of their "feelings," i.e., their desires, i.e., their "felt needs" of the 'moment.' (ibid.) "In the eyes of the dialectic philosophy, nothing is established for all times, nothing is absolute or sacred." (Karl Marx) When you dialogue your opinion with others to a consensus "nothing is established for all times, nothing is absolute or sacred." In this state of "being" or rather "becoming," "relationship building," i.e., "community," i.e., society, based upon common "self interest," i.e., common-ism, i.e., everyone's common desire of the 'moment'—which are ever changing—becomes the drive and purpose of life. As Karl Marx explained it, "It is not individualism [the child under the parent's, teacher's, boss's, ... God's authority] that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society ['compromising' for the sake of affirmation] is the necessary framework through which freedom and individuality are made realities." (Karl Marx, in John Lewis, The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx) The question is then: Are you a Marxist?
The agenda from the 50's on was to take the process of 'change,' i.e., the dialectic process, i.e., i.e., the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, i.e., the "win-win" attitude" into the classroom—merging Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud, i.e., socialism and psychology, i.e., social issues and personal issues, i.e., the student and "the group," i.e., the individual and the "community," creating "group psychotherapy"—and use the classroom as a therapy session, having students dialogue their opinions to a consensus, in order to 'change' the way they think and act. Thus through the children's participation in the dialoguing of their opinions to a consensus in the "group grade" classroom, their way of thinking and acting would be 'changed,' resulting in them taking their "new" way of thinking and acting back into the home, questioning, challenging, disrespecting, defying their parent's authority, i.e., attacking their parent's, creating conflict and tension in the home (not only between themselves and their parents but between the parents themselves as well) until the parents, in frustration, would turn to "group psychotherapy," i.e., the "help" of a facilitator of 'change,' i.e., the psychotherapist, , i.e., the "Transformational Marxist" (Marx + Freud—replacing outright physical force with group approval force) who in turn, by getting the parents to participate in the dialoguing of their opinions to a consensus (having to set aside, i.e., abdicate their power of authority—no longer demanding everyone do right and not wrong according to their establish standards) in order for them to discover "common ground" and "build relationship" with one another, their children, and anyone else who is participating in "the group" session, basing truth upon everyone's "feelings," i.e., common "self interests" of the 'moment,' thereby 'changing' their way of thinking and acting as well. According to the Marxist, Theodor Adorno (who was Benjamin Bloom's "Weltanschauung," i.e., world view), if a world of 'change' (the so called "new" world order) was to become reality, all government departments and agencies and secular and religious institutions, including the schools (public, private, and even home school co-ops), must use "social-environmental forces to change the parent's behavior toward the child"—resulting in parent's no longer preaching commands and rules to their children, to be obeyed as given, teaching facts and truth to them, to be accepted as is, by faith, but dialoguing with their children instead, basing communication upon everyone's "feelings," i.e., "self interest" of the 'moment' in order to "build relationship," i.e., "community," creating a "new" world order of "worldly peace and socialist harmony." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) By all appearances it "seems to" have worked.
While explaining dialectic 'reasoning,' requiring people to think—to humble, deny, control, discipline their "self," i.e., their "feelings," i.e., their desires or "self interest" of the 'moment' in order (as in "old" world order, i.e., "old school") to reason, i.e., to evaluate their "self" and the world around them from truth—instead of (as in the "new" world order) setting aside (suspending, as on the cross) the truth in order to 'reason' from their "feelings," i.e., their "self interest" of the "moment," establishing their "feelings" of the 'moment' as the bases of truth instead, in order (as in "new" world order) to 'justify' their "self"—I "lose" them. While sharing the scriptures, i.e., the truth—which exposes dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "self" 'justification—I "lose" them as well—especially the contemporary "Christian."
I may now "lose" you as I, in the following pages, use the Word of God to explain, i.e., to expose dialectic 'reasoning' i.e., you 'justifying' your "self" before others, i.e., 'justifying' your "feelings" (your desires and dissatisfactions, i.e., your "self interest") of the 'moment' with others, becoming intoxicated with and addicted to their affirmation, i.e., to their 'justification' of you 'justifying' your "self," thereby 'justifying' their "self"—turning you into "human resource" for someone else's (the facilitator of 'change's') pleasure and gain, with you all the while being deceived, "thinking" they are "helping" you because they said they cared about you, when in truth it is their "self interest" they are interested in. "Self interest" is like prospecting for gold with a "friend." When you find it you had better watch your back. Your "friend's" "self interest" might cost you your life—"self interest" is readily adaptable to 'change.' "Building relationships on self interest" can be a costly proposition. What seems to be good, i.e., "win-win" in the beginning can turn out to bad (you losing) in the end. "Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD." Jeremiah 17:5 "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?" Matthew 16:26 In death, we leave all that we have gained in this life behind—we can take none of it with us, including the praises of men—and thus, facing eternal death, can use none of it to gain (purchase) eternal life. God has "no pleasure in the death of him that dieth." All who die in their sins are damned in their "wisdom," i.e., in their love of this life, having chosen damnation over eternal life, rejecting Him who alone is eternal life. "For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye." Ezekiel 18:32
Why would you "take ownership" of someone else's business and property when it is theirs and not yours? Because you "covet" it. If someone can find out what your children "covet," i.e., get them to share their "self interest," i.e., through dialogue find out what their desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' are, they can seduce, deceive, and manipulate them, getting them to do unconscionable things—like selling their soul to them—for the pleasures of the 'moment.' The same applies to you. "And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you." 2 Peter 2:3 "And having food and raiment let us be therewith content." 1 Timothy 6:8 "Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee. So that we may boldly say, The Lord is my helper, and I will not fear what man shall do unto me." Hebrews 13:5, 6
It is a "lose-lose" situation for anyone sharing the truth in a "win-win" world—where the "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., "building relationships upon self interest," i.e., putting dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., the justification of "self" before men , i.e., "peace and affirmation" (enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' with the approval, i.e., affirmation of others, over and therefore against obeying the father/Father, i.e., doing the father's/Father's will, thereby negating the father's/Father's authority system in their feelings, thoughts, and actions as well as in their relationship with their "self," others, and the world) into praxis (social action), i.e., putting "theory" into "practice," i.e., "Make me feel good and I will listen to you," i.e., being "positive" and not "negative," i.e., pleasure (especially the pleasure which comes with affirmation, i.e., the approval of others with the same desires—which by the way, as stated above, is intoxicating and addictive), i.e., "group approval," i.e., dialoguing opinions to a consensus, i.e., to a feeling of "oneness," i.e., affirmation controls the feelings, thoughts, and actions of the children (including, and especially the children in adult bodies, i.e., the "children of disobedience")—blinding them, i.e., preventing them from coming "to the knowledge of the truth." 2 Timothy 3:7 Setting aside, i.e., 'compromising'—even for the 'moment'—truth you have been taught, in order to dialogue with others, i.e., in order to find "common ground" with them, i.e., in order to "build relationship" with them, is different than humbling, denying, controlling, disciplining your "self," i.e. your "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., your desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment,' i.e., your "self interest" in order to hear and receive the truth being preached and taught—your relationship (fellowshipping) with others from then on being based upon truth, i.e., the truth you and they have been taught and hold on to, having faith in the one preaching and teaching them/it instead of "building relationship" with one another based upon your and their "feelings," i.e., your and their carnal desires and dissatisfactions, i.e., your and their "self interest" of the 'moment, i.e., "building relationship upon self interest," i.e., "human nature" only, instead.
The commonality of the father, i.e., the earthly father and the Father, i.e., the Heavenly Father, as explained in Hebrews 12:5-11 is that they both 1) preach commands and rules to their children to be obeyed as given and teach facts and truth to them to be accepted as is, by faith, 2) rewarding or blessing those who obey and do things right, 3) chastening those who disobey and do things wrong (that they might learn to obey and do things right), discussing with them (at the father's/Father's discretion) what they are to do (in more detail) or what they did wrong, 4) casting out any who question, challenge, disregard, defy, and/or attack them and their authority. The difference between the earthly father and the Heavenly Father is that the former chastens his children in order to enjoy his own pleasures of the 'moment' while the latter does so in order that they might partake in His Holiness. What children have in common is their desire to enjoy the pleasures of the 'moment' and their dissatisfaction with whatever or whoever is preventing it, i.e., approaching pleasure and avoiding pain, dialoguing with their "self" their own "interests" ("self interests") of the 'moment,' yet still having a guilty conscience for disobeying or doing things wrong (according to the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth), as explained in Romans 7:14-25.
Philosophy is based upon the nature of the child, i.e., the child's desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment,' with the child dialoguing with his "self" 1) how the world "is," with him unable to do what he wants to do, when he wants to do it because of the father's/Father's authority (having to set aside his desires of the 'moment' in order to do right and not wrong according the father's/Father's standards, having to deny, humble, control, discipline his "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will), 2) how it "ought" to be, with him being able to do what he wants to do, when he wants to do it, without the father's/Father's authority getting in the way (having a guilty conscience for disobeying and doing things wrong), and 3) how it "can" be, where all children can do what they want to do, when they want to do it, without having a guilty conscience, if they could unit as one (in consensus), negating the father's/Father's authority in their "self" and the world, initiating and sustaining "worldly peace and socialist harmony" based upon their carnal nature only, instead. It is the role of the facilitator of 'change,' as explained in Genesis 3:1-6, to "help" children become their "self." By creating an environment where philosophy (the children 'justifying' their carnal nature) can become a reality, i.e., "self" can be "actualized," the facilitator of 'change,' i.e., "group psychotherapist" is able to "help" them create a "new" world order based upon nature (human nature) only. With everyone dialoguing their opinions of the 'moment' to a consensus, in the "group grade" classroom, they can (as one) overcome (negate) a world which is still subject to the father's/Father's "top-down," "do right and not wrong" (according to the father's/Father's standards, i.e., his/His will) authority system—preaching commands and rules to be obeyed as given, teaching facts and truth to be accepted as is, by faith—creating a "new" world order instead, where the drive of life is pleasure and its purpose is the augmentation of it, negating the father's/Father's authority system and the guilty conscience for doing wrong, i.e., for disobeying him/Him in the process, thus attenuating the pain which comes with missing out on the pleasure of the 'moment' as well as the pain which comes with being alienated or rejected by others, for making them "feel" bad, i.e., for creating a guilty conscience in them for participating in the pleasure of the 'moment,' in disobedience to their parent's will as well. Philosophy, i.e., dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "self" 'justification' is antithetical to the father's/Father's authority. The dialectic formula is explained (exposed) in the scriptures: Genesis 3:1-6, negating Hebrews 12:5-11, negating Romans 7:14-25, i.e., "self" 'justification,' negating the father's/Father's authority system, thereby negating the guilty conscience for doing wrong, i.e., for sinning, so that all can sin with impunity, i.e., have no fear of judgment, with everybody living in the 'moment' only, instead. This is what Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, and Georg Hegel had in mind.
If Jesus Christ is the truth (and He is), and He is the way (the only way) to the Father—the Father chastening those he loves that they might participate in his holiness, casting out those who reject His authority—then anyone rejecting the Father's authority rejects His Son, i.e., the truth as well. This is something the "contemporary Christian"—those basing "right" upon their (and others) "feelings," i.e., their (and others) desires of the 'moment,' especially their desire for affirmation from others (consensus)—can not accept, i.e., the Father's authority, since they are unwilling to be a witness (μαρτυρέω, i.e., martyr, Greek for witness), i.e., to stand alone, i.e., to be rejected (cast out, harmed, or even killed, i.e., silenced once and for all) by others, i.e., by "the group" for preaching and teaching the truth, i.e., for doing the Father's will (no matter what others might do to them in this life, i.e., in "the group," i.e., in the consensus meeting). "Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven." Matthew 10:32, 33 To be silent in the midst of unrighteousness, i.e., not to reprove, correct, or rebuke those who are tolerating, advocating, or putting it into praxis (because you, desiring their relationship, having something to gain from the relationship, fear being rejected by them) is to 'justify' unrighteousness, making it the norm. Your silence give consent.
While the Father, His Son, and His Spirit have life in and of themselves, giving eternal life to all who believe in and follow the Son, i.e., who, being justified in the Son, Jesus Christ, deny themselves and do the Father's will, Satan, i.e., the master facilitator of 'change,' who has no life in and of himself, takes all who follow him down his pathway of "self" 'justification,' i.e., of dialectic 'reasoning,' which (while 'justifying' the pleasures of the 'moment,' including the affirmation of men) leads to eternal death. Right is doing the Father's will, inheriting eternal life, not living for the pleasures of the 'moment,' which might seem to be "right" in the 'moment,' leading to eternal death. "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6 The gospel is about "the Father," "his [obedient] Son, Jesus Christ," and eternal life.
Dialectic 'reasoning' is all about man 'justifying' his "self," negating the Father's authority in his feelings, thoughts, and actions, and in his relationship with one another, 'liberating' his "self" from the Father's restraints, alienation, and the fear of eternal death, 'creating' a world of his own nature, i.e., a world of unrighteousness and abomination, where he can sin with impunity (until death). According to dialectic 'reasoning,' the father'/Father's authority must be left out of the "feedback loop" or the outcome will not be "right," i.e., man will not become "normal," i.e., "of and for self." "By 'dialectical' I mean an activity of consciousness struggling to circumvent the limitations imposed by the formal-logical law of contradiction [the father's/Father's "top-down," "right-wrong" authority system]." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death; The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)
While the believer has true fellowship "with the Father, and with his Son, Jesus Christ," denying his "self," dying to his "self" daily, willing to endure the rejected of men, sacrificing his natural desire for the affirmation of men upon the cross, proclaiming the truth instead, following the son, obeying the Father, doing His will—by faith in His Son obeying the Father—the "Christian," by placing obedience first, keeps "self" alive and in control of his behavior—acting the role of a believe but doing so without faith (in outward show/appearance being "religious," i.e., legalistic, but inwardly/privately full of "self," i.e., licentious), in truth being a hypocrite, i.e., an actor, i.e., acting the role of a believer without being one, believing in and holding onto, i.e., talking to, praying to, etc., "self" instead of talking to, praying to, i.e., fellowshipping "with the Father, and his Son, Jesus Christ." Role-playing, unlike acting (trying to act the role of someone else), is the person behaving according to his own "self's" inclinations, desires, and experiences, revealing his likes and dislikes ("feelings") of whatever he is "being" in the 'moment.' (Those of dialectic 'reasoning', rejecting the Father, and His son Jesus Christ, can not accept anyone fellowshipping with God, therefore must perceive the believer as being illusionary, i.e., putting on an act, being in "denial," he is not able or willing to be 'reasonable.') It is here, in role-playing, that dialectic 'reasoning' resides, the person's "feelings" of the 'moment' (desires and dissatisfactions) being revealed in his actions. The role of the facilitator is to distinguish between "healthy" roles and "unhealthy" roles, i.e., "positive" and "negative" behavior, "helping" all participants move from acting (not being themselves but someone else, i.e., acting as their parents, demanding others do right and not wrong according to their parent's position, i.e., according to their parent's commands, rules, facts, and truth) to being their "self," i.e., to being "of and for" their nature only, seeking "oneness" with the world only. You will notice that in dialectic 'reasoning' belief is regarded and treated as an opinion, as facts and truth are regarded and treated as theory, making all things relative, i.e., situational, i.e., subject to the process of 'change,' i.e., adaptable to 'change.' The task at hand is to work on a project which all can participate in and to do it in a way that all can build relationship with one another while doing it, overcoming the affect (divisiveness, i.e., prejudice) of their parent's behavior—as God, insisting everyone do right and not wrong according to their established standards, causing individualism, i.e., division.
The Marxist Erick Fromm (who Benjamin Bloom referenced as his "Weltanschauung," along with Theodor Adorno) wrote: "All that matters is that the opportunity for genuine activity ["self interest" and "collective identity," i.e., consensus] be restored to the individual; that the purposes of society and of his own become identical [that personal thought and social action, i.e., "theory and practice," i.e., the pleasures of the 'moment' and affirmation become one and the same]." (Erick Fromm, Escape from Freedom) John Dewey wrote: "It is not the will or desire of any one person [the parent, teacher, boss, ... God] which establish order but the moving spirit of the whole group ["the group's" consensus, i.e., the "feeling of oneness" being put into social action, negating the spirit of restraint, i.e., individualism under God] . Control is social." (John Dewey, Experience and Education) "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 [can the guilty conscience for doing wrong, i.e., for disobeying the parent and/or God be negated]." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)
The dialoguing of opinions, i.e., of everyone's "feelings," i.e., their desires and dissatisfactions, i.e., their perception of the 'moment,' i.e., of the current (personal-social) situation, overcomes the affect their parent's preaching, teaching, and discussion has upon them, overcoming divisiveness of "positions held" (belief, i.e., "private convictions") and the guilty conscience for doing wrong, allowing consensus (oneness based upon "feeling") to be developed, uniting everyone upon their common "self interests," i.e., that which they all have in common. Cell groups and youth groups, using the dialoguing of opinions to arrive at a consensus is the hallmark of "Church Growth," "Emergent Church," and all other (current and future) socialist engineered (facilitated) religious programs, using "the group's" "feelings" of the 'moment' to create unity (worldly peace and socialist harmony).
You persuade (and are persuaded) with facts and truth. You manipulate (and are manipulated) with "feelings." Even mixing the two (manipulating the facts, i.e., cutting, rearranging, and re-pasting the facts or truth, excluding what does not fit or support your desired outcome, i.e., approving "appropriate information," i.e., "positive input" while disapproving "inappropriate information," i.e., "negative input" in order to engender desired "feelings") moves you in the direction of manipulation, making the praxis of seduction and manipulation more deceptive.
Those who are in the "know" (gnosis), regarding dialectic 'reasoning,' know that when you make "truth" subject to your (and others) "feelings" of the 'moment,' truth, which comes from above, i.e., which is of the Father, and his son, Jesus Christ, becomes "irrational," and therefore "irrelevant," in your eyes, i.e., in your perception, affecting your thoughts and actions. As you can see in our Facebook, i.e., social medial, i.e.., "feelings" based culture, "there is no fear of God before their eyes." Romans 3:18
The difference between your "truth" and truth, is one is from within, i.e., "experiential," i.e., of "sense experience" (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3), of the child within, i.e., of "self" seeking oneness with the world, i.e., "lusting" after the pleasures of the 'moment,' including the affirmation of others, and the other is from without, from the Father, having to be preached and taught, and accepted by faith, resulting in you refusing to participate in the pleasures of the 'moment' and, if and when necessary, standing alone (enduring the pain of being rejected by others) in order to do right and not wrong, according to the Father's will.
These are two different paradigms, i.e., ways of feeling, thinking, and acting and relating with "self," others, the world, and authority, one being Patriarch, i.e., of and for the Father, established once and for all, and the other Heresiarch, "of and for" the child, i.e., "of and for self," ever 'changing,' i.e., adapting to the situation of the 'moment,' with Matriarch, being transitional, caught in between the Father—doing right and not wrong according to His commands, rules, facts, and truth (traditional), with the wife submitting herself to her husband—and the children—approaching pleasure and avoiding pain (transformational), with the wife yielding to the children's (and/or her) desires of the 'moment' over, and therefore against her husband's (the children's father's) commands, rules, facts, and truth. While children grow up and leave their home, they carry with them their parent's "top-down," "right-wrong" way of thinking and acting. Dialectic 'reasoning,' by washing from the children's brains the "top-down," "right-wrong" way of thinking and acting, turn the children against their parent's "top-down," "right-wrong" way of thinking itself, establishing a world hostel to the traditional paradigm of Godly restraint, i.e., the Heavenly Father's authority in the process. Beginning with what originated in the child's heart, love of self and hate of restraint, i.e., "human nature," hate of Godly restraint, i.e., hate the Father's authority, hostility toward the gospel message—man as a sinner needing an obedient son of the Father, Jesus Christ to cover his sins—has now become the law of the land. The Lord explains the conflict or tension (antithesis) this way: "No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." Luke 16:13 "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 "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6 "In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him." "Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit." 1 John 4:9, 13 "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." 1 Corinthians 2:14
Georg Hegel, 'justifying' his "self," i.e., his carnal nature, i.e. his "lusts," placed his hope in his "self" and the world alone, making (in Gnostic fashion) the child's use of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., his ability to 'justify' his carnal nature over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority, the essence of god itself. Hegel, void of spiritual discernment, i.e., rejecting God, made all that "is," of the world alone, i.e., material, i.e., sensual, i.e., experiential. Pitting the child's nature against the father's/Father's authority, establishing the child's nature as the "ground of being," Hegel made dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., the child's ability to 'justify' his "self," his only means to salvation—saving "self" from the father's/Father's authority, i.e., i.e., saving god from God. He wrote: "There cannot be two kinds of reason and two kinds of Spirit; there cannot be a Divine reason and a human, there cannot be a Divine Spirit and a human, which are absolutely different. Human reason — the consciousness of one's being is indeed reason; it is the divine in man, and spirit, in so far as it is the Spirit of God, is not a spirit beyond the stars, beyond the world. On the contrary, God is present, omnipresent, and exists as spirit in all spirits." (Georg W. F. Hegel, Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion) "For it, namely reason ["self" 'justification'], is itself the essential fact, the spirit, the Divine Spirit." (G. W. Hegel in Carl Friedrich, The Philosophy of Hegel)
In Gnostic fashion, according to Hegel, the essence of god, i.e., the "Divine" in the child, is the child's ability to 'justify' his "self," i.e., to 'justify' his nature, i.e., to 'justify' his carnal desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority, making "self," i.e., "self" consciousness, i.e., the dialoguing with one's "self" the very "being" of god himself, with god "becoming" as children, through the dialoguing of their opinions with one another, i.e., 'discovering' "common ground" (common-ism) with their "self's," 'liberating' their "self's" (god, i.e., the god of "love," i.e., pleasure, i.e., Eros, i.e., "lust," which is "of and for" man and the world, i.e., "of and for" the individual and society or community, i.e., "of and for" "peace and affirmation") from the father's/Father's authority (God, i.e., the God of Holiness, Righteousness, Perfection). In consensus, i.e., uniting their "self's" as "one," putting consensus (god "becoming," i.e., god actualizing his "self") into social action (praxis) they are then able to negate the father's/Father's authority not only in their feelings, thoughts, and actions, but in their relationship with their "self," others, and the world as well. While Hegel talked about it, 'liberating' the child's/man's nature, killing the father's/Father's authority in the process, Karl Marx put it into praxis (social action), killing the father's authority in society outright. Today, with children dialoguing their opinions to a consensus in the "group grade" classroom—killing the father's/Father's authority in themselves—they are going home questioning, challenging, defying their parent's authority (with government approval and support) instead—if you approve and support the child's nature you disapprove of and refuse to support the parent's authority to restrain it. The Lord's response to all who follow this way of thinking and acting, i.e., using dialectic 'reasoning' to 'justify' your "self" is: "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 ["self" 'justification,' i.e., "self" righteousness,' i.e., the pride of life, i.e., dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., the dialoguing of men's opinions to a consensus, i.e., man "becoming" as god himself, knowing good and evil according to his nature alone—with man's nature being of the world only, carnal] is abomination in the sight of God." Luke 16:15
It is in and from the children's (and our) heart, i.e., their carnal desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' that the harlot and the beast reside, rise up, and rule. The harlot—deceiving the children into believing that pleasure is the standard for "good"—is their heart's love of pleasure over, and therefore against the Father and his authority, i.e., over, and therefore against doing the Father's will, doing their will instead, following after the pleasures of the 'moment.' The beast—the wickedness within them—is their hearts hatred toward the Father and his authority, made manifest when he restrains them, preventing them from having what it is they want, when they want it. "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9 It is out of the children's heart, i.e., their desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment—unrestrained by the father's/Father's authority—that the so called "new" world order is 'created,' i.e., is initiated and sustained, with the children ("helped" by facilitators of 'change' to dialogue their opinions to a consensus, i.e., to a "feeling" or "sensation" of "oneness") working together as one, negating the father's/Father's authority in their feelings, thoughts, and actions, as well as in their relationship with their "self," others, and the world, 'liberating' their "self" and the world from having to do right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, engendering a world of unrighteousness and abomination instead.
When we 'justify' the children's (our) heart, i.e., their love of pleasure, making pleasure the standard for "good" (instead of doing right and not wrong according to the Father's will) we guarantee their hatred toward the Father. (Pleasure is not evil in and of itself. God gave it to us to enjoy. We become evil when we establish it over and therefore against doing the Father's will.) This is the "secret" and the "power" of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., of "self" 'justification': you do not have to attack the father, just 'liberate' the children from his authority, i.e., "help" them 'justify' their "self" in their own eyes and they will do it for you. "There are many stories of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook 2: Affective Domain, p. 83, commonly referred to as "Bloom's Taxonomies," [where the children's' learning is taxonomized, i.e., classified, i.e., graded according to their "feelings" of the 'moment' regarding "self," others, the world, and authority] by which all teachers are "certified" and schools are "accredited" today, including "Christian," with facilitators of 'change' "helping" children 'justify' their carnal desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment,' encouraging them to put them into praxis, as was done in a garden called Eden—where the master facilitator of 'change' "helped" two "children" 'liberate' their "self" from the Father's authority, blinding their "self" to their hearts deceitful and wicked ways, why the Father sent his obedient son, Jesus Christ into the world to bring man, those who have faith back to His way.) "And this is the condemnation, that light [the Father's obedient Son] is come into the world, and men loved darkness [their "self" and the world, i.e., pleasure] rather than light [doing the Father's will], because their deeds were evil ["of and for their 'self'" and the world]." John 3:19 "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." "If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him." 1 John 2:16, 15. "Take heed therefore that the light [dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "self" 'justification,' i.e., enlightenment, i.e., illumination] which is in thee be not darkness." Luke 11:35 "And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers [facilitators of 'change'] also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works ['justifying' their "self," dying in their sins]." 2 Corinthians 11:14, 15 "And for this cause [because men 'justify' themselves, i.e., their love of "self" and the world, i.e., their love of pleasure more than God] 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 world]." 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 12
A "win-win" world is a world of children, with the "help" of facilitators of 'change,' 'justifying' their "self" (Genesis 3:1-6), 'liberating' their "self" from the father's/Father's authority (Hebrews 12:5-11), negating their having a "guilty conscience" for doing wrong (Romans 7:14-25), so they can be at peace with their "self" and "at-one-with," i.e., affirmed by the world, i.e., so they can sin with impunity. It is what the so called "new" world order is all about—a world of children, with the "help" of facilitators of 'change,' 'liberating' their "self" from the father's/Father's authority system, becoming, according to dialectic 'reasoning,' as they were before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into their life, "of (and now for) their self" and the world only, which is not true since man, unlike the rest of the creation, became a living soul because of the breath of God, God first forming him from the dust of the ground, man at that point having no life in him.
It all begins with the parent's, how they train their children up to think (or turn them over to others to do it for them). According to dialectic 'reasoning,' "win-win" is when children are able to do what they want to do, when they want to do it, with the approve (affirmation) of one another, i.e., their peers, i.e., "the group." "Lose-lose" is when they have to humble, deny, control, discipline their "self" under their parent's authority, being rejected by other children who, holding to their parent's position, reject them—because of their parent's position. Parental authority, as well as God's authority, "losses" out in a "win-win" world. "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
When children "rule," when they become the focus of life (communication, entertainment, etc., has been lowered to the fourteen year old, i.e., adolescence level—including commercials), i.e., when their "feelings," i.e., their "perception" of the 'moment" becomes the foundation from which to determine "right" from "wrong," the people are oppressed. It is not just academics taking place in the classroom, it is a way of thinking that is being used to 'change' how your children relate with their "self," others, the world, and you, washing from their brain respect for your (and God's) authority. Through their participation in the consensus process (the "group grade" classroom), i.e., affirming one another's carnal desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' (which applies to all ages, young and old) they are 'redeeming' their "self" from the father's/Father's authority, 'reconciling' their "self" with the world only, instead, engendering oppression, destruction, and death in the end. While those "of and for self," i.e., "of and for the world only" might claim: "The words 'seem to' are significant; it [your children's opinion of the 'moment,' i.e., "what seems to be" or "feels" right to them in the 'moment'] is the perception which functions in guiding behavior." "Neither the Bible nor the prophets, neither the revelations of God can take precedence over [their] own direct experience." "Experience is, [for them], the highest authority." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy), God says "There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 16:25 "It is not in man that walketh to direct his steps." Jeremiah 10:23 is negated in the consensus process, i.e., in therapy, i.e., in the "contemporary" classroom, where children experience 'liberation' from their parent's (and/or God's) authority. "Prior to therapy [the "group grade," i.e., the "group psychotherapy" classroom] the person [the child] is prone to ask himself, 'What would my parents want me to do?' During the process of therapy the individual come to ask himself, 'What does it mean to me?'" (Carl Rogers, ibid) In their isolation, i.e., separated from their parent's authority, unable to stand alone, they find their identity with one another, i.e., within "the group," affirming one another's carnal desires of the 'moment' (for pleasure) and dissatisfactions (toward restraint),' collectively, in consensus, establishing their "self's" over (and therefore against) their parents authority.
What you need to know about dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "self" 'justification,' i.e., your children "Reasoning" from their "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., from their affective domain, 'justifying' their desires and dissatisfactions of the ''moment' over (and therefore against) your authority as a parent, i.e., no longer reasoning from your commands, rules, facts, and truth, questioning them and challenging your authority instead, basing their decisions upon their "perception" (aufheben) of the current situation or environment (which is stimulating their "feelings" of the 'moment'), making them subject to whoever is seducing and deceiving them be manipulating it (and therefore them as "human resource"—as is done to natural resource) for their, i.e., the seducer, deceiver, and manipulator's own pleasure and gain—how putting dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "self" 'justification' into social action (praxis) is affecting ('changing') your children, you, and the world we are living in. How can your children resist the enemy of their soul (and why would they?) when he has their "self interest," i.e., their carnal desires of the 'moment' in mind? If your children, through their participation in the consensus process, learn how to "circumvent" (negate) the restrainer of their life, i.e., the father/Father and his/His authority system, who is to keep them from 'justifying' their "self," i.e., from satisfying their carnal desires of the 'moment,' who is to save them from dying in their sins? "Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon." Isaiah 55: 7
The information in the two bolded links above are essential to understanding the antithesis (conflict and tension) between the father/Father and the children/you, making it clear why there can be (and is) no synthesis, i.e., no true and lasting place 'liberated' from the Father's authority system—except in the imagination, which is not true (real, i.e., tangible, although it might "seem to be" at times), nor lasting (being only transitory, subject to our desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' and the environment or situation stimulating them, including the imagination itself). Synthesis (a supposedly "safe" place where "self" is 'liberated' from the Father and His authority, i.e., where "self" can become "actualized"—viventem) is a lie perpetrated, i.e., initiated and sustained by a facilitator of 'change, i.e., a group psychotherapist, who, as a pedophile/pimp (who can come across as a very loving, caring, compassionate, innocent, intelligent, "wise," etc., person) seduces, deceives, and manipulates children/men and women for a living, using them as "natural resource," i.e., as "human resource" for his own pleasure and gain. "But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived." 1 Timothy 3:13 "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools," Romans 1:22 (Romans 1:19-32) The truth is: "every one of us shall give account of himself to God." Romans 14:12 "But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment." Matthew 12:36
The gospel is all about the Father, and His Son, Jesus Christ, who was obedient to His Father in all things He commanded. "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 The Lord has instructed us to be that which we can not be in and of our "self," i.e., perfect. "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." Matthew 5:48 It is in the law we discover our imperfection, the law, being perfect, revealing our deceitful and wicked heart, i.e., our "human nature," which is imperfect, condemning us. It is in the Son's obedience to the Father, i.e., fulfilling the law, dying on the cross for our disobedience that we receive 'redemption,' i.e., his righteousness (perfection) being imputed to us by faith, and in his resurrection, by the Father, 'reconciliation' with the Father. Without the Father there is no Son. Without the obedient Son there is no gospel message, i.e., salvation and a true and lasting "fellowship" "with the Father" and "his Son Jesus Christ."—"and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." 1 John 1:3 In our fellowshipping "with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ," we are to "have the mind of Christ," who was obedient to his Father in all things commanded (1 Corinthians 2:16), "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
Dialectic 'reasoning' negates the Father's authority, resulting in man making the Son in his own image, i.e., "of and for" human nature, i.e., "of and for" the "good life" in this life alone—an example of someone willing to suffer and die (fighting against the "establishment") in order to make the world a "better place" for us all to live in—leaving us with the socialist's gospel (which excludes the Son's obedience to His Father in all things commanded—with the Son calling us to die to our "self" daily, endure the rejection of men, and following Him, in His righteousness and by the power of the Holy Spirit doing His Father's will). Dialectic 'reasoning' is antithetical to the gospel, claiming itself to be the "good news" instead—'justifying' the child's carnal nature, making him at-one-with the world, with the facilitator of 'change' "helping" him work with the other children of the world, uniting himself as one with them (and them with him), in consensus meetings 'creating' a "new" world order where they all can live for, and enjoy, the pleasures of the 'moment' unrestrained by the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth and a "guilty conscience" for disobedience—disobedience to the father/Father ("children of disobedience") being the hallmark of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., of "self" 'justification.'
The dialectic process (being used today in the classroom, workplace, government, and even in the church) is not academics. It is a way of life or rather a way of death claiming to be the way of life being used to 'liberate' children from the father/Father and his/His restraints, i.e.., from the father's/Father's authority system, i.e., from doing "right and not wrong" according to the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., from doing the father's/Father's will, thus 'liberating' children from having a "guilty conscience" for disobeying, i.e., for questioning, challenging, defying, ignoring, attacking, etc., their parents. "Freud and Hegel are, like Marx, compelled to postulate external domination and its assertion by force in order to explain repression." "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." "In the words of Thoreau: 'We need pray for no higher heaven than the pure senses can furnish, a purely sensuous life. Our present senses are but rudiments of what they are destined to become.'" "To experience Freud is to partake a second time of the forbidden fruit;" (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History) "If the guilt accumulated in the civilized domination of man by man can ever be redeemed by freedom, then the 'original sin' must be committed again: 'We must again eat from the tree of knowledge in order to fall back into the state of innocence.'" (Herbart Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: A philosophical inquiry into Freud)
The pattern or method of dialectic 'reasoning'—the 'reasoning' being used to 'create' the so called "new world order"—which requires the "help" of a facilitator of 'change in order to initiate and sustain it, is as "new" as what happened in the garden in Eden (Genesis 3:1-6), affecting the world which followed—before (and after) the flood. It is simply children, with the "help" of a facilitator of 'change,' 'liberating' themselves from the father/Father, negating his/His authority system (Hebrews 12:5-11) in their feelings and thoughts, as well as in their relationship with themselves (collectively) and the world, i.e., in their social actions (praxis), so they can sin with impunity, i.e., so they can "do wrong" (disobey) without having a "guilty conscience" (Romans 7:14-25)—"as in the days of Noe." (Luke 17:26)
When sensuousness, i.e., your children's desire ("lust") for the pleasures of the 'moment,' including their desire for the approval of other children, i.e., affirmation becomes the 'drive' of life, then the 'purpose' of life becomes the augmentation of pleasure, including the pleasure which comes with the approval of other children, i.e., affirmation, with them living "in and for" the "eternal present," i.e., living "in (and for) the 'moment.'" In a "purpose driven life" where children (and you) will spend eternity (based upon righteousness, either God's righteousness, leading to eternal life, or their own 'righteousness,' leading to eternal death) is no longer an issue, i.e., is of no interest. As you can see in our Facebook society: "There is no fear of God before their eyes," there is no fear of the consequences of their thoughts and actions of the 'moment,' with being "liked" and "friended," i.e., being affirmed by and affirming one another (being approved by men) becoming the "drive" and the "purpose" of life. Romans 3:18
"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 With the flesh children (we) "lust" for pleasure. With their eyes they "lust" after (covet) the things of the world (which stimulate pleasure within them). With pride they 'justify' their "self" before one another—with approval from one another, i.e., affirmation blinding them to the consequence of their carnal thoughts and carnal actions ("theory and practice"). "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9
When children make their heart, i.e., their "feelings," i.e., their desires of the 'moment,' i.e., their affective domain the foundation from which to determine what is "good" and what is "evil" they make pleasure the standard for "good" (instead of doing right and not wrong according to God's, i.e., the Father's will) thus deceiving themselves and all who "trust" in them. "Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD." "Blessed is the man that trusteth in the LORD, and whose hope the LORD is." Jeremiah 17:5, 7 "It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man." Psalms 118:8
When children use dialectic 'reasoning,' 'justifying' their "self," i.e., their carnal desires before other children (who have the same desires) they "esteem" their "self" as being right—becoming righteous in and of their selves, i.e., in their own eyes. 'Justifying' their "self," i.e., their carnal desires of the 'moment,' their wicked heart is made manifest when they ignore, dishonour, defy, strike out against (negate) the father/Father and anyone else who inhibits or blocks them from doing what they want to do, when they want to do it, doing so without having a "guilty conscience." "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
When we (as children) refuse to "submit" our "self" to God (who reveals to us who we are and who He is, and warns us of where we are going and by whom we are being lead—when we refuse to "submit" ourselves to Him), i.e., when we, in consensus, 'justify' our "self" before men, i.e., when we trust in our "self" and in the opinions of men, we end up perceiving God and His Word as being "irrational" ("unreasonable"), i.e., out of touch with our "feelings" (desires, i.e., opinion) of the 'moment,' and therefore "irrelevant" in a world of 'change,' i.e., in a world stimulating and 'justifying' our carnal desires and dissatisfactions (opinion) of the 'moment,' deceiving ourselves and all who "trust" in us, making God and His Word subject to our "feelings" (opinion) of the 'moment,' thus making God in our own image, becoming as God ourselves—righteous in and of ourselves—instead. When we accept the facilitator's "Ye shall not die," i.e., "We can talk about anything," i.e., his "safe" "open ended, non-directive, non-judgmental, 'positive'" zone of affirmation ('liberated' from the father's/Father's authority system) we become as God, knowing good and evil, making good and evil subject to our carnal desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment.' United as one, i.e., in consensus, with one language, i.e., the language of the heart, i.e., our desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' (made manifest through the dialoguing of our opinions to a consensus), "nothing will be restrained from" us, which we "have imagined to do." "And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do." Genesis 11:6
The verse "Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you." (James 4:7) is as foreign to "Christians" today as children honoring and obeying their parents. Children, in the classroom, are now listening to facilitators of 'change' tempting them to disobey, i.e., to "set aside" ('compromise') their parent's/God's commands, rules, facts, and truth (which inhibit or block relationship) in order to "get along," i.e., in order to "build relationships" upon common "self interests," i.e., in order to "'think' for themselves," i.e., in order to "do their own thing." Instead of fighting against the "church," the devil has joined it, "helping" it, through facilitated meetings, i.e., through the dialoguing of everyone's opinions to a consensus ('justifying,' i.e., affirming the deceitfulness and wickedness of men's hearts) "grow" itself upon the desires and dissatisfactions, i.e., the nature of man. We are now "esteeming ourselves," i.e., "exalting ourselves," desiring and receiving the praises of men in the 'moment,' instead of humbling ourselves, doing the Father's will, letting Him exalt us "in due time." "Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time:" 1 Peter 5:6
Life has always been, and will always be about the father/Father and his/His authority, i.e., doing the father's/Father's will and the child's nature, i.e., the children "lusting" after the things of this world, wanting to do their will instead. While children are born with faith, an ability to identify with and "feel" bad for (have a conscience regarding) someone or something being wronged (hurt), and the desire for approval from their parents/God, dialectic 'reasoning' turns the children's desires to that which is of sight, i.e., of the world only, negating faith, incorporates their "feelings," i.e., their desires of the 'moment' in deciding what is right and what is wrong, negating the "guilty conscience" for doing wrong (according to their parent's/God's standards), searing the conscience, replacing it with the so called "super-ego," and turns their heart to desiring "the group's" approval (affirmation) instead of their parent's/God approval, 'compromising' their parent's/God's standards in order (as in "new" world order) to initiate and sustain "socialist harmony and worldly peace" instead. "The philosophers have only interpreted the world in different ways, the objective however, is change." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #11) In other words, while we all have our opinion of how the world "ought" to be, imagining it according to our own "self interest," i.e., our carnal desires of the 'moment,' socialist harmony and worldly peace can not be attainted without everyone dialoguing their opinions to a common consensus (to a "feeling" of "oneness"), initiating and sustaining the 'change' process so that no one persons opinion can ever restrain another's, inhibiting or blocking the facilitator of 'change' from having his way.
All of philosophy (from Heraclites on, actually from the garden on), psychology, sociology, anthropology, etc., i.e., "group psychotherapy" is based upon the agenda of the master facilitator of 'change' "helping" children 'liberate' themselves, i.e., their "self" from the father's/Father's authority (Genesis 3:1-6), with facilitators of 'change' encouraging children (in an "open ended," "non-directive," i.e., "non-judgmental" group setting) to "Reason" dialectically, i.e., to dialogue their opinions to a consensus, i.e., to 'justify' their "self," coming to know (gnosis) and save (preserve) their "self" as they are, carnal, of the world only, becoming at-one-with themselves and the world in the process. Through the children's use of dialectic 'reasoning' , 'justifying' their carnal nature, blaming someone else, including (especially) the father/Father for their problems, the children are not only able to negate the father's/Father's authority (Hebrews 12:5-11) in their feelings, thoughts, and actions, as well as in their relationship with themselves and the world, they are also able to negate their having a "guilty conscience" (Romans 7:14-25) for disobeying the father/Father, i.e., for doing unconscionable things, i.e., for their praxis of unrighteousness and abomination (love of "self" and the world—'justifying' their "self" and the pleasures of the 'moment' over and therefore against "the love of the father/Father"—who chastens his/His children, that they might learn to do right and not wrong). "If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him." 1 John 2:15
If you have the "love of the Father," you chasten your children that they might "do right and not wrong," hating it (not them) when they do wrong. If you "love the world" you let ("help") your children become "of and for" themselves, i.e., "of and for" "human nature" only, becoming "of and for" their carnal nature and the world alone—resulting in them hating the father/Father or anyone else who, getting in their way, inhibits or blocks them (and/or their friends) from enjoying the pleasures of the 'moment.'
Dialectic 'reasoning, i.e., "higher order thinking skills" in morals and ethics (in personal-social issues), i.e., "critical thinking" is not academics. It is Genesis 3:1-6 ("Reasoning" being used to 'justify' the children's carnal desires of the 'moment') being put into praxis, 'liberating' children from the father's/Father's authority. It is the Karl Marx in the children , i.e., their hate of the father's/Father's restraint, i.e., the children's nature being made the law of the land. It is why those of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., those who focus upon the children and their "feelings" of the 'moment' (facilitators of 'change,' i.e., group psychotherapists, i.e., seducers, deceivers, and manipulators of children)—coming between the father/Father and his/His children, "helping" them 'justify' themselves, i.e., 'liberate' themselves from the father's/Father's restraints—have gained the upper hand. When we should be focusing upon the father/Father, upon doing his/His will, i.e., doing what is "right and not wrong," we are focusing upon the children and their "feelings," i.e., their desires of the 'moment' instead—encouraging them to do their will, "lusting" after the things of this world, 'liberating' their hatred toward the father/Father and his/His authority, i.e., the restrainer in the process. "No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." Luke 16:13
Georg Hegel focused upon the children, i.e., the children's nature (as do all socialists-humanists-environmentalists-globalists)—making the family, the community, the "church" subject to it. Hegel wrote: "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 [as he learns, through dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "self" 'justification,' how to 'liberate' himself (his "self") from the father's/Father's authority, i.e., from the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth which prevent him from being his "self"—"of and for" his carnal nature and the world of pleasure only]." (Georg Hegel, System of Ethical Life) The child ("self"), still subject to the father's/Father's authority, is Hegel's "particular." Hegel's "universal" is the children becoming one, i.e., "of and for self," as they, through their use of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "self" 'justification,' collectively 'liberate' their "self" from the father's/Father's authority. In establishing the child's nature ("human nature"), i.e., "self" over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority, 'liberating' the child from Godly restraint, Hegel (sounding more like Karl Marx, than Karl Marx himself—who was not yet born), negated your right of private convictions and private property (sovereignty), i.e., unalienable rights, under God, negating your right to say "My children, not yours," "My property, not yours," My business, not yours," "My wife (or husband), not yours"—as God said "My garden, not yours." Hegel, by establishing the child's carnal nature ("human nature"), i.e., "self" over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority (humbling, denying, controlling, and disciplining "self" in order to "do right and not wrong" according to the father's/Father's will), could then write: "On account of the absolute and natural oneness of the husband, the wife, and the child [their common "lust" for pleasure, including (and especially) their desire for approval from one another (affirmation), i.e., "self" esteem], where there is no antithesis [no "top-down," "right-wrong, "Mine, not yours" way of thinking and acting] of person to person or of subject to object, the surplus is not the property of one of them, since their indifference is not a formal or a legal one." ibid.
The common praxis of dialectic 'reasoning' is you (the disenfranchised) 'liberating' your "self" (and the community, including the "church") from the father's/Father's authority—as is reflected in Karl Marx's and Sigmund Freud's statements. Marx wrote: "Once the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the heavenly [Holy] family, the former must be destroyed [Vernunft, i.e., annihilated] in theory and in practice [in the children's thoughts and actions]." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis # 4) Freud wrote: "'It is not really a decisive matter whether one has killed one's father or abstained from the deed,' if the function of the conflict and its consequences are the same [the father no longer has authority in the home, i.e., in the feelings, thoughts, and actions of the children as well as in their relationship with one another and the world]." (Sigmund Freud in Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization) "Freud noted that patricide and incest are part of man's deepest nature." (Irvin Yalom, The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy) In Freud's history, the children killed the father in order to have sensual (sexual) relationship with their mother and between themselves, i.e., abomination without having a "guilty conscience" doing so—the "guilty conscience" being engendered in the children because of the father's/Father's authority. Jean-Jacques Rousseau (a libidinous, lubricious, womanizer) proclaimed (in defiance to "the earth is the Lord's and the fulness thereof." 1 Corinthians 10:26): "the fruits [pleasures] of the earth belong to us all [to me], and the earth itself to nobody." (Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discourse on Inequality) Immanuel Kant's phrases, "lawfulness without law" and "purposiveness without purpose" simply mean that the "laws" of the child's carnal nature rules without the father's/Father's authority, i.e., without the laws of un-natural restraint, making the "purpose" of life the fulfillment of the child's carnal nature instead of doing the father's/Father's will. (Immanuel Kant, Critique of Judgment) Picasso stated that "in art one must kill one's father." The common theme of those intoxicated with dialectic 'reasoning' is: kill the father, i.e., allow the children to be themselves, without parental/Godly restraint.
In this way of thinking the facilitator of 'change,' i.e., the "group psychotherapist," i.e., the 'liberator' of children from the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the "prince of the power of the air" rules the world—seducing, deceiving, and manipulating all children to become at-one-with (in consensus with) him in his praxis. "Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others." Ephesians 2:2, 3
Facilitator's of 'change,' i.e., "group psychotherapist's"—those of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., those initiating and sustaining a "shadow government" of philosopher kings (the vanguard party), with all department (including government), education, business, and religious "group" meetings dialoguing opinions to a consensus (a soviet), regarding how the world "is," i.e., still subject to the father's/Father's authority ("prejudiced," divided), how it "ought" to be, i.e., "of and for self" (affirming the child's carnal nature, i.e., "human nature"), and how it "can" be, i.e., "of and for" liberté, égalité, fraternité (united as one), with everyone initiating and sustaining the process of 'change,' i.e., negating the father's/Father's authority wherever they go—see your children as being their children, your property as being their property, your business as being their business, i.e., the world and all that is in it, including you, as being theirs, as the women in the garden "saw" the "forbidden tree" as being her tree. What they see they own. You therefore must support (pay) them in dues, permits, taxes, tariffs, and tithes as well as in volunteer work (voluntarism) in order for them to oversee you ("sight based management"), making sure that you are taking proper care of what is "theirs."
continue to Part 3 or return to Part 1
© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 1997-2022
