authorityresearch.com

"Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths."  Proverb. 3: 5-6

The Institution for Authority Research
Exposing the Dialectic Process.
deangotcher@gmail.com 

About, Issues, Articles, Schedule, Material, Scheduling, Audios, Youtube, Radio, Archived, Textus Receptus, Class, Warnings, Thanks!  P.S.

And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them. And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour: the child shall behave himself proudly against the ancient, and the base against the honourable."  "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths."  Isaiah 3:4-5, 12  "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."  Jeremiah 6:16   "... and children shall rise up against their parents, and shall cause them to be put to death."  Mark 13:12  (Mark 13:5-13)

Back in 1996, when I first began explaining the ideology of Hegel, Marx, Freud, LukŠcs, Gramsci, Adorno, Habermas, Lewin, Moreno, Rogers, Maslow, "Bloom's Taxonomies" (now "Marzano's, Webb's Taxonomies"), etc. , i.e. exposing the dialectic process in the light of the Word of God, I was invited to speak everywhere.  Then, when I began exposing its language, i.e. the "Not," "Why?" "Is," "Ought," "Thought" sequence of self 'justification' (the parent's preaching and teaching of restraints, i.e. of commands and rules to be obeyed and facts and truths to be accepted as is, by faith, i.e. "You can not go out," the child's "Why?" to get the parent into dialogue, the parent's "Because I said so," preventing dialogue, the child dialoguing with his "self" regarding his desire, his "ought," i.e. his opinion of the 'moment' revealing his love of pleasure and hate of restraint, then his dialoguing with others of like desires and dissatisfactions), i.e. making it personal, I was invited to speak less often.  It appears that even "Christian conservatives" don't want their 'justification' for 'compromise' (becoming like 'liberals') exposed, i.e. their setting aside the gospel, i.e. not bringing up God's judgment upon sin and salvation through Christ Jesus, in order not to "offend" others in their effort to "save" America.

Now that I expose the dialectic process for what it is, i.e. the praxis of unrighteousness, i.e. man 'justifying' himself before men (making himself 'righteous' in his own eyes, as a child 'justifying' his desires makes himself "equal" with the father's authority, i.e. establishing his "feelings," i.e. his opinion (aufheben) of the 'moment' over and against the father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, negating the father's authority in his feelings, thoughts, and actions and in his relationship with others) not even "the church" (its leadership) will let me speak within its walls, its "drive" and "purpose" now being based upon dialectic 'reasoning' (upon man's opinion of the Word of God, i.e. exonerating "sensuousness," i.e. augmenting pleasure, i.e. promoting "human relationship" and "human 'reasoning,'" i.e. basing 'righteousness' upon man's approval of man, i.e. upon consensus, i.e. growing itself according to polls, surveys, and feasibility studies, i.e. upon "group approval," i.e. upon what man has in common—his love of pleasure and hate of restraint AKA common-ism) instead of upon faith (with us evaluating, i.e. reproving, correcting, and rebuking our "self," i.e. our feelings, thoughts, and actions, i.e. our desires of the 'moment,' and the world around us according to the Lord's commands, rules, facts, and truth, with His righteousness being imputed to us by faith, i.e. according to His work alone, 'redeeming' us from His Heavenly Father's wrath upon us for our sins (by His blood), 'reconciling' us to His Heavenly Father instead (by His resurrection), with us weighing our "self," others, the world, and His Word with His Word, with His Holy Spirit confirming it, directing our steps). "Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him."  Romans 5:9  "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him."  John 3:36  "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;"  Romans 1:18

Likewise, after years of speaking on radio programs across the nation (at both conservative and liberal stations), I have not been invited to speak on any radio shows since I spoke on the father's/Father's authority and righteousness some two years ago.  Speaking on righteousness (the father's/Father's authority) in a dialectic world (where man 'justifies' himself before men, seeking man's approval, i.e. where the child's "feelings" are 'justified' over and against the father's authority) is like speaking into an empty barrel, not even hearing your own voice come back.  The hatred toward righteousness these days is palpable, i.e. manifested in laws created by men in order to 'justify' abomination, i.e. to "esteem" "self" over and against God's commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e. negating the authority of His Word, i.e. 'liberating' "self" from Godly restraint.  "Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God."  Luke 16:15

It is impossible to please God without faith.  It is impossible to keep your faith (to be justified in Christ, i.e. to be approved of the Father based upon your faith in His Son, with you repenting of your disobedience, i.e. of your sins, with the Son's obedience to His Heavenly Father in all things, i.e. His righteousness being imputed to you by faith, i.e. finding joy and peace in His Word) and 'reason' dialectically (to 'justify' yourself, i.e. to be approved of men, based upon approaching-augmenting pleasure and avoiding-attenuating pain, i.e. finding pleasure and enjoyment as the "drive" and "purpose" of life).  Despite your best effort to serve the Lord (dying to yourself daily, individually before God) and serve man at the same time ('justifying' your "self" through the approval of men), trusting in the Lord (being justified by faith in the Lord, i.e. basing truth upon His Word—confirmed by the Holy Spirit, i.e. having the Father's approval) and leaning to your own understanding (being 'justified' by sight, i.e. basing 'truth' upon "sense experience," i.e. finding consensus with self, others, and the world, according to nature—conforming yourself to the world, with the approval of men) are anathema to one another.  Dialectic 'reasoning' can only 'justify' "self," i.e. the carnal 'moment,' negating the soul, i.e. eternity in the feelings, thoughts, and actions of men.  The word of God, when shared as your opinion becomes just some more noise (another opinion) in a noisy room (in a room full of opinions).  Not until you silence (humble and deny) your "self" and share the word of God as is, can those in the room hear it for what it is, i.e. the truth, more than likely turning on you for sharing it (preaching to them).  "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."  Romans 10:17   "And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God."  Romans 12:2

It is impossible to "serve God and mammon," i.e. to be subject to the father's/Father's authority and the child's nature at the same time.  If we start with the father's/Father's right and wrong, then we have to make our "self's" natural "lust" of pleasure, i.e. natural inclination to approach pleasure and avoid pain subject to the father's/Father's authority.  Since his/His right and wrong are unadaptable to 'change,' i.e. unadaptable to our "feelings" of the 'moment,' "self's" love of pleasure and hate of pain is negated as the foundation from which to determine right and wrong from.  But if we start with pleasure, i.e. with our "self's" natural inclination to love pleasure and hate of pain, we have to make right and wrong subject to our desires, i.e. making right and wrong adaptable to 'change,' i.e. subject to our "felt needs" of the 'moment,' i.e. subject to the given situation), negating the father's/Father's authority, i.e. his/His right and wrong in the process.  "No man 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 [the one above, i.e. the truth established forever] and mammon [the many below, i.e. your "feelings" which are forever subject to 'change']."  Matthew 6:24

Dialectic 'reasoning' deceives us into believing that we can have it both ways, i.e. serve God (refusing to compromise His Word, doing right and not wrong according to His Word, despite the given situation, i.e. reproving, correcting, or rebuking unrighteousness in our "self" and in others despite the rejection, i.e. despite the persecution which comes from them, i.e. humbling, denying, controlling, disciplining our "self" in order to be approved of God) and serve man (willing to compromise to be approved of men, i.e. doing "right" and not "wrong" according to the given situation, i.e. being silent in the midst of unrighteousness, i.e. not reproving, correcting, or rebuking unrighteousness in our "self" and in others, i.e. esteeming our "self" and their "self" in order to be approved of them), only leaving us with "mammon" ("human nature" and "human 'reasoning,'" i.e. self 'justification,' i.e. "self-actualization," i.e. aufheben, i.e. dialectic 'reasoning') in the end.  It is not just the loving of "mammon" that is the problem it is the hating of God (and those who believe in Him) that ensues (if you love "mammon," i.e. your "self" and the world, you have to hate God, i.e. the Father's authority), with those of dialectic 'reasoning' 'justifying' in their minds the negation (killing) of those of faith in the Lord (at least turning their heads the other way as others do it), in the name of 'creating' "worldly peace and socialist harmony."   "Making the world safe for democracy" (safe for the tyranny of the masses, safe for the flesh) would not be such an issue in this life (being just some rhetoric) if it was not for the violence and bloodshed that ensues, i.e. the lack of tolerance that it engenders, i.e. that it 'justifies' in the name of 'change.'   Behind love is hate.  If you love God you hate sin.  If the child loves the Father he hates his sinful nature to disobey.  If you love sin, i.e. your "self" and the world, you hate God.  If the child loves his sinful nature he hates the Father's authority.  In the former God has taken care of sin by faith in Him, i.e. in Him and in His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ.  In the latter (making the world "safe for democracy," i.e. safe for sin, i.e. safe for the augmentation of pleasure and the attenuation of pain as being the only foundation from which to determine right from wrong from, i.e. thinking and acting according to the given 'moment') you have to kill those who love God (who preach and teach right from wrong according to God's Word), or at least let others do it for you as you turn your head the other way as though nothing has happened, doing so without having a "guilty conscience," since that comes from love of the father's/Father's authority, which you have negated in your feelings, thoughts, and actions and in your relationship with others (seeking the approval of men over and against the Lord God, i.e. rejecting, persecuting, and negating those who believe in God, i.e. who deny their "self," pick up their cross, i.e. willingly face the rejection of men, even their own "friends," and follow the Lord, in obedience to His, now, in faith in Christ, their Heavenly Father).  For example: Roe vs. Wade was based upon the Supreme court's 'shift' from right-wrong (Christianity, i.e. accountability to God, the eternal consequence of one's thoughts and actions) to pleasure-pain (Stoicism, accountability to man, the sensuous 'moment' of pleasure) as being the foundation from which thought and action (theory and practice) is to be based.

When you negate (set aside or no longer recognize, i.e. perceive as being "irrational" and therefore treat as "irrelevant") the father's/Father's authority, i.e. no longer do right and not wrong according to his/His standards, which engenders a "guilty conscience" for doing wrong, i.e. where the soul (righteousness/doing right and not wrong and eternity/inheritance) is the concern of life, replacing his/His authority with facilitators of 'change' "helping" children actualize their nature, i.e. approaching pleasure and avoiding pain, i.e. which engenders the "super-ego" where the flesh (sensuousness and the carnal 'moment,' i.e. "self" and the world) is the concern of life, making the "drive" and "purpose" of life the augmentation of pleasure and the attenuation of pain (including the pain of missing out on pleasure—because of having to submit to the father's authority, doing right and not wrong according to his will, i.e. which is "negativity" to the flesh, i.e. inhibiting or blocking you from your carnal desires of the 'moment,' i.e. that which is of nature) you end up doing unconscionable things in the flesh (putting into praxis "self" 'justification,' that which all children/men have in common, making it "self-social" 'justification') which "war[s] against the soul," with the universal (that which of the world, i.e. the child's carnal nature, i.e. the flesh of man) negating the heavenly (that which is of the father/Father, i.e. God, i.e. His law, Word, and Holy Spirit and the soul of each individual man accountable before God) in the feelings, thoughts, and actions (in the values) of men.  "Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul;" 2 Peter 2:11  "For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world [the approval of man, which is temporary, in the 'moment' only, passing away], and lose his own soul [the approval of God, which is eternal]?"  Mark 8:36 

When the universality (commonality) of fruit trees is learned, the individuality of each particular fruit tree, according to Karl Marx (The Holy Family), is never seen the same way again, the individual fruit tree only being perceived through the universality of "the Fruit Tree" from then on.  In the same way the children (in "group therapy") no longer perceive themselves as being under the father's/Father's authority, individually isolated from the universal, i.e. from all the children of the world, i.e. with children being isolated from one other according to their father's/Father's standards, but now perceive their identity as being "equal" (common) with all the children of the world over and against the father's/Father's authority (correlated to parochialism, individualism, nationalism) which divides them from one another.  Thus individuality (the soul of man, i.e. doing right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's will, i.e. the "guilty conscience") is sacrificed to universality (the carnal nature of the children, i.e. the augmentation of pleasure and the attenuation pain, i.e. the "super-ego"), 'liberating' the child/man to do unconscionable things in the name of universality, i.e. "Making the world safe for democracy."

There was a time when we were horrified when we learned of German solders killing our soldiers (after our soldiers had surrendered to them) as well as their own solders (who were wounded), because they were perceived as being a drain on their resources, but today we are not horrified when we kill the innocent and the helpless (the unborn and elderly) because they are perceived as being a drain on ours.  Socialism, whether national or global, has this common epitaph, "I was simply doing my job" (without a conscience).

Mimesis (dialectic imagination, "dialectic phantasies," Martin Luther) is man's ability to take something and make it into what it is not (as a child, in his mind, turns a broom into a horse, man can, in his mind, turn another man's wife, another man, a child, etc. into his object of sexual pleasure, imagining them as his, i.e. turning good into evil and evil into good) in order to get pleasure out of them for himself, 'justifying' his feelings, thoughts, and actions (based upon pleasure as being the 'drive' and 'purpose' of life) in the process. "And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."  Genesis 6:5  "And as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man." Luke 17:26  "For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) 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 10:3-6

It is difficult to see the dialectic process ("self" 'justification') for what it is, i.e. evil, because it is such a big part of your life, i.e. your ability to talk to your "self," which draws you to the world, for example: talking to your "self" while crossing a steam, i.e. deciding which rocks to step on so as not to fall in—which is not evil (unless someone is telling you which rocks to step on, who knows, and you, in defiance, refuse to listen), or talking to your "self," i.e. deciding for yourself how you are to relate with your "self," others, the world, and God, i.e. 'justifying' your "self," i.e. 'justifying' your carnal desires of the 'moment' over and against the father's/Father's restraints, negating the father's/Father's authority, i.e. the "guilty conscience" in your feelings, thoughts, and actions, and in your relationship with others in the process, which is evil.  The dialectic process is the praxis of Genesis 3:1-6—where the first facilitator of 'change' "helped" two "children" 'justify' their heart's desire of the 'moment' over and against the Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, negating Hebrews 12:5-11 (the father's/Father's authority) and Romans 7:14-25 (the "guilty conscience") in their feelings, thoughts, and actions and relationship with one another in the process. 

When you talk to your "self," 'justifying' your feelings, thoughts, and actions of the 'moment' (disregarding Godly restraint in the 'moment,' i.e. refusing to talk or fellowship with the Lord in the 'moment' for direction, i.e. refusing to humble, deny, control, discipline your "self" before the Lord in the 'moment' to listen to what He is telling you, i.e. not reproving, correcting, rebuking your "self" in the 'moment' regarding what you have done, are doing, or are thinking about doing that is wrong or evil, i.e. not weighing your "self" in the 'moment' according to His Word) you become "as god" yourself, weighing your "self," others, the world around you, as well as God Himself and His Word according to your "felt needs" ("feelings") of the 'moment,' i.e. from your "lusts" of the flesh and eyes, and pride of life, i.e. from the world (your flesh, i.e. the law of the flesh and sin), which the "self" loves, with you directing your own steps in the 'moment' instead of the Lord.  Your soul is (you are) eternal, i.e. subject to God.  Your "self" is not, being subject to the world only.  Unless you humble, deny, control, discipline your "self" under God, i.e. reproving, correcting, rebuking your "self," making it subject to God (doing right and not wrong according to His will) your "self" will make you subject to the world alone ('justifying' itself, i.e. seeking after pleasure and avoiding pain, including avoiding the pain of standing alone for truth, i.e. missing out on pleasure as well as having to endure the pain of rejection).  

Your ability to talk to your "self" in the 'moment' makes you an individual in the world ("a particular in the universal," i.e. a "thing in itself" according to Hegel), i.e. the center of concern, weighing what is going on around you from your "self," making you as a god, 'righteous' in and of your "self," determining right from wrong according to your nature, i.e. according to your natural inclination of approaching pleasure and avoiding pain, i.e. according to the sensuous 'moment.'  The same is true for every person who is on the face of earth at this very 'moment,' judging all the world around them (including you) from their talking to their "self," 'justifying' their "self," making themselves as god, weighing what is going on around them in the "light" of whether it will bring them pleasure or pain.  Apart from God, i.e. the Father's authority, man perceives himself as being god, determining right from wrong based upon the survival of his flesh.  But man is not god (singularly or collectedly with others, i.e. "thing for itself," or universally, i.e. "thing in and for itself"), being by his nature, i.e. his flesh, subject to this world, i.e. "Only from Nature" (Marx).  God is God, i.e. "I Am that I Am," with man (his soul) depending upon God and His Word for eternal life.  "It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."  Matthew 4:4

'Justifying' your "self" with "group approval," even "in the name of the Lord" does not change a think.  Every one you meet today (who is not walking in the Lord, not having "fellowship with the Father, and with His son Jesus Christ") is talking to their "self" in the 'moment,' i.e. 'justifying' their "self" in the 'moment' (thinking about what they or others have done, are doing, or are planning on doing that might affect them "positively" or "negatively"—bring them pleasure or pain) according to their "felt need" of the 'moment' (concerned with how other's are feeling or what they are thinking about them that can affect their pleasures of the day—especially the pleasure that comes from the approval of others who are providing pleasure in the 'moment' and/or have the potential of providing pleasure in the future).   Everyone is running to and fro, seeking to control the world so that they can have pleasure, including the pleasure which comes from the approval of others, making their "self" the center of the world, becoming as god in their own eyes (in their imagination).  The truth be known no man controls the world, the world controls him, making his feelings, thoughts, and actions subject to it.  When the "feeling" of pleasure which comes from the approval of men (made manifest though dialogue, i.e. where everyone is openly sharing what they are talking to their "self" about, uniting on a common opinion, i.e. the common desire for pleasure and hate of restraint—where the individual is transformed from being a god in himself alone to where the "group," including him, becomes as god collectively, or rather the facilitator of 'change' becomes god in the eyes of all 'willing' participates), i.e. the "feeling" of "group" approval, i.e. the "feeling" of consensus, i.e. the "feeling" of "oneness," i.e. "We working for Us," i.e. "We working for 'God'" becomes the "drive" and the "purpose" of life, the "church," even doing "wonderful things in the name of the Lord," becomes apostate, approving (esteeming) its "self" according to the approval of men instead of letting the Lord God direct its steps (with each individual member doing God's will in the body, i.e. thinking and acting) according to His Word, lead by His Holy Spirit with God getting the glory.  The individual (talking to his "self") who finds his identity in "the group" is 'liberated' from the Lord.  He is no longer humbling and denying his "self" under God, but "esteeming" his "self" (even doing "wonderful things in the name of the Lord") with "group approval" instead.  "Every one that is proud in heart is an abomination to the LORD: though hand join in hand, he shall not be unpunished."  Proverbs 16:5

If you start with the child, i.e. with "human nature," i.e. with the "feelings" of the 'moment,' instead of with the father's/Father's authority, i.e. with his commands, rules, facts, and truth, then the father's/Father's authority (restraint) is negated and abomination (the child's carnal nature) rules.  If you are silent in the midst of unrighteousness, i.e. refusing to reprove, correct, or rebuke those who are unrighteous, in order to initiate or sustain relationship with them, unrighteousness rules (becomes the "norm").  If you are silent in the midst of the child's rebellious nature, i.e. refusing to reprove, correct, or rebuke him, in order to initiate and sustain relationship with him, the child's rebellious nature rules (becomes the "norm"). 

Dialectic 'reasoning' follows the line of "progression" ('reasoning') from the child's 1) consciousness of the world of pain and pleasure, becoming aware of the pleasure of the world (approaching it) and the pain engendered by the father's authority, i.e. learning to avoid the pain (chastening) which comes from the father by avoiding the pleasure which comes from the world, 2) self-consciousness, where the child privately talks to his "self" about his desire for pleasure, i.e. desiring that which comes from the world and his resentment toward pain, i.e. resenting the father's authority which restrains him, and 3) self-actualization (true 'reasoning,' Selbstveršnderung, i.e. self-transformation) where the child is united with the children of the world in common "discourse," with all children openly dialoguing their opinions to a consensus with one another, 'justifying' themselves with one another (their love of pleasure and hate of restraint), to become at-one-with their nature, one another, and the world, in pleasure, in the 'moment,' thereby 'liberating' themselves from the father's authority, i.e. negating the father's authority (rigidity, negativity) in their feelings, thoughts, and actions, as well as in their relationship with one another and the world in the process, putting "class consciousness" (consensus) into social action, i.e. into praxis, i.e. uniting theory (opinion) and practice (social action), negating the father's authority from society (from the world), creating a "new" world order where facilitators of 'change,' ruling over ("guiding," "coaching") the children instead of the father, live off of the children's labor and inheritance ("surplus capital"), without having a "guilty conscience."

The "new world order" is initiated and sustained by facilitators of 'change' "helping" children 'liberate' themselves ('liberate' their "self" by esteeming their "self"), i.e. 'liberate' their affective domain (their "feelings," i.e. "felt needs" of the 'moment') from the father's authority, using what is not theirs, i.e. what is the father's (the children's inheritance) for their own pleasure in the end.  It is the praxis of psychoanalysis (the idea that when a child is forced to suspends pleasure, i.e. to set aside his carnal desire of the 'moment,' i.e. to reprove, correct, rebuke his "self" according to his father's/Fathers commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e. to suppress his impulse or urge to become at-one-with the world in pleasure in the 'moment' in order to do the father's will, i.e. to satisfy someone else's pleasure, i.e. to capitulate himself to a foreign entity instead, he engenders capitalism, i.e. "neurosis," "repression," and "alienation").  Note: void any understanding (acceptance) of the work of God on the heart of man (with regenerated man walking in the spirit instead of according to the flesh) all that those of the world have to work with is man's carnal nature.  Starting with man's carnal nature all they can end up with is the 'justification' of man's carnal nature.  Psychoanalysis is the praxis of "helping" children learn how to use dialectic 'reasoning' in order to 'liberate' themselves (their "self") from the father's authority, from having to do right and not wrong (according to the father's standards)—where the children sustain the "old world order" based upon righteousness (at least the semblance of it) doing what is right (established by the father) despite the pain of missing out on the pleasure of the 'moment,' where they must set aside their nature, i.e. the pleasure (the temptation) of the 'moment' to become at-one-with the world, i.e. resist the "eternal present," i.e. resist 'change' to do the father's will.  The "new world order" is based upon the seduction, deception, and manipulation of the child's carnal nature in order to get them to do their carnal will instead, i.e. moving them from approaching pleasure and avoiding pain while still submitting to the father's authority of right and wrong, engendering a "guilty conscience" for approaching pleasure, i.e. for doing wrong, to the augmenting of pleasure and attenuating of pain only (negating the father's authority) in the process, i.e. 'creating' a "new world order" based upon sensuousness only, i.e. based only upon the child's natural love of pleasure and hate of restraint (the affective domain).

When facilitators of 'change' teach children dialectic 'reasoning' (critical thinking, i.e. "higher order thinking skills" in morals and ethics) in order to "help" children 'justify' their carnal desires of the 'moment' over and against the father's authority, i.e. 'liberate' themselves from the father's authority, they "help" them negate (overcome) the father's authority (the "guilty conscience") in their feelings, thoughts, and actions and in their relationship with one another, gaining jurisdiction over his property and business (in the name of "the people," i.e. in the name of "community," i.e. in the name of society), using it for their own carnal pleasures instead, doing so without having a "guilty conscience."  When children have no parental restraint (no father's authority) in their lives, i.e. when they have no "guilty conscience" for doing wrong, thinking through their "feelings" of the 'moment' instead (having a seared conscience, i.e. a "super-ego" instead, i.e. where "right" and "wrong" is based upon the "feelings," i.e. the "sensuous need" and "sense perception" of the 'moment'), i.e. 'justifying' themselves ('actualizing' their "self"), i.e. 'justifying' their "feelings" (their impulses and urges) of the 'moment' (being old enough to know the difference between right and wrong but refusing to recognize that what they are feeling, thinking, and/or doing is wrong), doing what they "feel" like doing in the 'moment' instead (disobeying their parents with impunity, i.e. with no fear of or concern regarding judgment, i.e. perceiving their parents commands, rules, facts, and truth as being irrational, i.e. out of touch with their carnal desires of the 'moment,' therefore treating them and their authority as being irrelevant), they end up tolerating or doing unconscionable/abominable things, i.e. praxis-ing dialectic 'reasoning' (diaprax).  By the facilitator of 'change' "helping" the children, i.e. "the group" 'liberate' themselves from the father's authority, the children, i.e. "the group" (united in consensus, i.e. united in a "feeling" of "oneness') will praxis negating (removing) the father and his authority from society (without having a "guilty conscience").  Our inheritance is found in the father's/Father's authority.   When we negate the father's authority we negate our inheritance, turning our lives (and our inheritance) over to those who helped us 'liberate' our "self" from the father's authority, having to spend the rest of our lives with them controlling our lives, doing unconscionable things to us (with no "guilty conscience").

The greatest barrier to compromise, i.e. to 'change,' i.e. to community, i.e. to socialism, i.e. to globalism is the child's "guilty conscience," i.e. the father's authority in the feelings, thoughts, and actions of the child, interfering with his relationship with those who are seeking after pleasure over and against the father's will.  If the father's authority (the "guilty conscience") remains in the child's feelings, thoughts, and actions, and in his relationship with others, the "new world order" can not be initiated and sustained.  It is therefore imperative, according to dialectic 'reasoning,' that the father's authority (the "guilty conscience") be negated in the child's feelings, thoughts, and actions, and in his relationship with others, if a "new world order" is to be initiated and sustained.

If you want to initiate and sustain world unity (globalism), diaprax is the procedure which is to be followed, i.e. teaching children how to build unity (how to "build relationship") upon what they all have in common, i.e. their love of pleasure ("self interest") and hate of restraint, 'justifying' their canal desires of the 'moment' (the "feelings" of the "present") as well as their resentment toward parental restraint (the standards of the "past").  With the help of facilitators of 'change,' children, doing what comes naturally, i.e. talking to themselves, i.e. 'justifying' their love of pleasure (including the pleasure which comes from others approving, i.e. getting pleasure out of their having pleasure) and their hate of restraint (their hate of the pain which comes from missing out on pleasure, i.e. including the pain which comes from being rejected by other children who they want approval, i.e. 'justification' from), can be united as "one."  By sharing (dialoguing) their desires (opinions), 'discovering' their common love of pleasure and hate of restraint (where they are willing to 'compromise'), they can (with the "help" of a facilitator of 'change'') learn not only how to 'discover' and unite upon their "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e. come to a consensus but also how to put their common "feeling" (consensus) into social action (praxis), negating the father's authority in their feelings, thoughts, and actions and in their relationship with one another (as well as in society), taking that which is not theirs to take (taking that which is the father's) for themselves, having no "guilty conscience," in the process.

When children negate the father's authority (parental restraint, i.e. the "guilty conscience" for doing wrong) in their feelings, thoughts, and actions of the 'moment,' and in their relationship with one another, i.e. when they refuse the father's chastening of them (to restore them to doing what is right), thinking that they can do wrong with impunity, i.e. doing what they think ("feel") is right in their own eyes instead, i.e. evaluating themselves, the world, and their father's commands, rules, facts, and truth according to their "feelings," i.e. "desires," "lusts," "enjoyments," pleasures," i.e. their opinion of the 'moment,' they bring upon themselves the father's wrath in the end (being cast out of the home as a "child of disobedience," i.e.  being "cut out" of the will—that is, unless the father's authority is rejected by society, i.e. superseded by "community needs," with the community focusing upon the children's "felt" needs of the 'moment' (the children's "self interest"), with facilitators of 'change' uniting the children and the community ("building relationship") upon the social action (praxis) of 'liberating' the children and the community from the father's authority, i.e. taking what is the father's for themselves, forcing the children to follow them if they are to have access to what was the father's, i.e. his property and business (which was to become their inheritance), now in the hands of the facilitators of 'change' ("the children of disobedience"), being using for their own carnal gain instead.

What is true for the child is true for man.  Without Godly restraint, i.e. without Godly sorrow, repentance, and turning from his sins, man (as a child who 'justifies' himself over and therefore against his father's authority, i.e. sinning with impunity) engenders a world of unrighteousness and abomination, bringing upon himself God's judgment (the Father's wrath) in the end (being cast into Hell as a "child of disobedience," i.e. being "cut out" of the will).  "For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.  Let no man deceive you with vain words [with words your fleshy/carnal mind wants (desires) to hear, 'liberating' yourself from Godly restraint]: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.  Be not ye therefore partakers with them."  "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.  For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret."  Ephesians 5:5-7, 11, 12  "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   "As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.  Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.  To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne."  Revelation 3:19-21

A persons use of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. 'justifying' themself according to their "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e. according to their desire for pleasure and their desire to relate with (not be rejected by) those they get pleasure from, i.e. who approve ('justify) their compromising of the truth in order to initiate and sustain that pleasure, prevents them from hearing you as you warn them of what is happening to them.  It is why they give you that "deer in the headlights look" when you share the truth with them, with them excusing themselves, having something (more) important (they just remembered) they have to do, "having eyes which are human eyes, and ears which are human ears" (Karl Marx), interested only in that which makes them "feel" good in the 'moment,' hating anything which might prevent them from having their carnal way.  Every effort is made to silence those who speak of righteousnessreproving, correcting, rebuking sensuousness—using dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. self-social 'justification,' to silence anyone who might arouse a "guilty conscience" within them for their wicked ways. "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." 2 Timothy 4:3, 4  "And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them."  Matthew 13:14-16

Karl Marx (as did Sigmund Freud) knew ...  (Continued)

© Institution for Authority Research  Dean Gotcher 1997-2015