authorityresearch.com
"A plus negative A equals A"
(A
+ -A = A)
("Hegel's" dialectical diabolical formula)
Forward
by Dean Gotcher
March, 2011
(revised: 10-11-2011)
Forward:
Note: all bracketed information
inserted within quotations is added by me and is not from the original
source. I am throwing you in, so struggle through (some of this,
or maybe most of this article, may be hard to grasp at first reading but
will become understandable if you press on through―think
it through). This article is like a college course in itself, at
least how they used to be taught: revealing, demanding, and life
changing in doing what is right (good) and not doing what is wrong
(evil).
Part 1 and
Part 2,
how the formula (A plus -A equals A) is used to produce 'change,' will
be more understandable as you read through this forward and the
following introduction.
This article explains the
'reasoning' behind the formula for the "new" world order, i.e. the 'drive' and the 'purpose' for
'change.'
I am writing this article more as a witness to what has
happened than as an effort of stopping it from happening. It seems
the more I hone in on the root cause and effect of the dialectical process (sensuousness and 'reasoning'
superseding righteousness, 'reasoning'
freed from the restrains of righteousness, that is to say
reasoning freed from
deductive reasoning, i.e. reasoning freed from facts and truth
preached and taught "as is," "as given," i.e.
reasoning freed from revelation
truth―facts and truth are no longer ascertained through didactic reasoning, whereby a person is thus 'liberated' or
freed to 'reason' by the means of sensuousness alone, freed
to 'reason' by means of
inductive reasoning, whereby he can 'reason' from his own feelings
and thoughts, i.e. reason from his own "sensuous needs" and
"sense perception," i.e. his own "sense experience," freed to
'reason' "from his own nature only"―'facts'
and 'truth' are now 'discovered' through dialectic
'reasoning'), and its effect upon this country, fewer
people want to hear what I have to say, come to me for answers, or want
me around. People want to get rid of the "bad
side" of the dialectic formula (totalitarianism) without dealing with the formula itself because of
what they get from its "good side" (sensuousness freed
from the restraints of righteousness). In other words, they might
lose what they gain from their use of the formula, i.e. the sensuous
(carnal) pleasures of this
life. If you understand what I am saying and take it to heart and
live accordingly it will increasingly cost you as well (in 'friends').
What even the church is preaching today is a "financially successful" ("enjoyable")
Christianity, i.e. "If it is going to
cost me in money and friends (cost me in the pleasures, i.e. cost me
in the "enjoyment" of this life, especially the "approval of men"), I'm not interested."
What they are saying in their thoughts and their actions is:
"Without 'the approval of man' we can not be 'successful' in doing
God's work."
"Forasmuch
then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves
likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath
ceased from sin; That he no longer should live the rest of his time in
the flesh to the lusts of men [living according to his own sensuousness,
i.e. lusting after the things of the world], but to the will of God
[living according to God's imputed righteousness, i.e. lead by
His spirit―Galatians 5:13-26]. For the
time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the
Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine,
revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries: Wherein they think
it strange that ye run not with them to the same excess of riot,
speaking evil of you: Who shall give account to him that is ready to
judge the quick and the dead." 1 Peter 4:1-5
bracketed information added While this verse applies to the
worldly
it unfortunately now also applies to the 'church,' i.e.
the 'contemporary church,' i.e. the sensuous 'church,' the
apostate 'church,' i.e. the dialectic 'church,' i.e. the 'church' which
does not want to appear 'religious' or offend the 'natural' man,'
i.e. the church which is 'driven' by the sensuousness of man for the 'purpose' of winning
souls for their "Kingdom of God," i.e. a Kingdom which is built upon the
sensuousness and 'reasoning' abilities, i.e. "marketing
skills" of man (supposedly along
with the righteousness of God―an
impossibility since the righteousness of the Lord, i.e. a gospel
of "suffering" in the flesh where God rules over
the persons thoughts and actions, the person having humbled his will―of the
flesh―to God's will―of the spirit―can not be in harmony with a "gospel" of "sensuousness,"
a gospel of "pleasures" of the flesh whereby man, or rather the
environment which stimulates pleasure, is in control over his thoughts
and actions―engendering "the pride of life," i.e. a "gospel" glorifying the
sensuousness and 'reasoning' abilities of lustful men who are in
control, i.e. think they are in control of their own lives.)
All men
must die to themselves as well as die to the approval of their fellow
man―die to "the lusts of men"―and follow after the Lord,
giving him total authority over their lives, to be a
witness of the true gospel, "living the rest of his time in the flesh
... to the will of God," i.e. living "in the world but not
of it," i.e. living in the world of sensuousness below
but thinking and acting according to that righteousness which can
only come from God above―James
4:1-10. The dialectical question is: "How do you
'market' a gospel of pain, i.e. 'suffering.'" The dialectical
answer is: "You transform it into a gospel of pleasure, i.e.
'enjoyment' in this life, and 'market' it.
Define it as a gospel of sensuousness, built upon the
pain-pleasure spectrum of the man, i.e. of man's needs, works, and
solutions (concerned is about pleasing man, i.e. man has input in his
salvation) and you can "grow" the church with "marketing skills"
all day long. But if you identify it (according to the word of
God) as a gospel of righteousness, built upon the redemptive work
of God alone, (concern is about pleasing God, i.e. only the Lord can
impute salvation to man) with the redeemed "suffering in the flesh"
and only "the Lord add[ing] to the church daily"―"such
as should be saved"―then
"marketing" it is out of the question. "And
the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved."
Acts 2: 47
The "pride of life" is the self-esteemed man (group
esteemed man, i.e. of "man's approval") deceived
into believing that he is in control of his own life, i.e. controlling the
environment (or being at one with it) for
the 'purpose' of augmenting pleasure, when in truth it is the
environment (the "approval of men") which is in control of him. Since it,
i.e. the environment of approving men, consists
of that which is gratifying to him (dopamine emancipation, i.e. the
chemical our body naturally produces which stimulates a craving, a
wanting for the object which stimulated its emancipation within our
body) it, i.e. the environment of approving men, is in reality 'driving' him into
action to initiate and/or sustain its stimulation of pleasure
in him. As I stated in an early article on the subject of
dopamine (A
Spiraling Process of "Changingness"), "The person is not in love with the object which stimulates
Dopamine emancipation, he is in love with the emancipated Dopamine which the
object stimulates. He just wants to control the gratifying object (the
environment) for more
Dopamine
emancipation."
Making it (the object in the environment) subject to his will makes him subject
(servant) to its gratifying power (dopamine emancipation). Manipulating it for the augmentation
of his own sensuous pleasures makes him seducible,
deceivable, and manipulatable by those who control it, i.e.
manipulate it and therefore him, for their own sensuous
pleasures, making all participants servants to the "lusts of men." "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
Whatever it is that is gratifying to a person, that the state
or any institution which is under the influence and control of
sensuousness, including the 'church,' has the potential of
taking from him, has control of him because sensuousness (the
things of this world, i.e. the world) has control of him. One of
the most powerful controls over a person is the desire for "the approval
of men." "The approval of man" is the
means whereby they are able to attain or retain the other
gratifying things of the world (engendering the "pride of life"). Thus when a man is "liberated" from
the restraints of God, i.e. when sensuousness is liberated from
the restraints of righteousness, a man is under the control of
the world. But when a man is dead to himself and alive in Christ
(humbling himself before the Lord and casting all his cares upon Him), i.e. when righteousness
thwarts the seduction, deception, and manipulation which
comes through sensuousness, he is liberated from the controlling
nature of the world, i.e. he is "free indeed." "Jesus
answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin
is the servant of sin. And the servant abideth not in the house for
ever: but the Son abideth ever. If the Son therefore shall make you
free, ye shall be free indeed."
John 8:34-36
While freedom, for fallen man, might
be perceived as being found in the 'liberation' of sensuousness
from the restraints of righteousness, it is only control that he
finds. "We can achieve a sort of control under which the
controlled, though they are following a code much more scrupulously than
was ever the case under the old system [the "old system"
meaning the system of Righteousness as will be explained
below], nevertheless feel
free. They are doing what they want to do, not
what they are forced to do. By a careful design, we
control not the final behavior, but the inclination
to behavior―the motives, the desires, the wished
[that which is of the system of sensuousness, i.e. of the
flesh]. The
curious thing is that in that case the question of
freedom never arises." (Carl
Rogers, on
becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)
True freedom is found in righteousness.
Freedom is negated in the praxis of sensuousness,
i.e. the praxis of the "new" world order, i.e. the praxis
of servitude to the flesh and sin. Man can only be
freed from the controlling power of sensuousness by the
righteousness of God. Freedom from the praxis of
(servitude to) sensuousness, i.e. the praxis of (servitude
to) sin, i.e. the praxis of (servitude to) the "new" world order
can only be found in Christ Jesus, His
righteousness being imputed to whosoever that believes upon
him―whosever that walks by faith (lives in His righteousness) and not
by sight (lives in servitude to their sensuousness). Those of the
"new" world order, blinded by their "lust" for, thus being controlled
by, the things of this world, can not comprehend this truth, their minds
being darkened by the "pride of life."
The 'church' which markets "the gospel" (using polls,
surveys, feasibility studies, and synergistic programming, i.e.
guided by the environmentally seduced, deceived, and
manipulated opinions of men) so that the
world can understand it and join with it and it can understand the world and join
with it―both becoming or
'emerging' as one―is a sensuous 'driven' 'church' and a
sensuous 'purposed' 'church,.' i.e. a purpose driven 'church'
which is in, of, and for the world―'emerging'
at-one-with the world in the praxis of controlling the world,
i.e. being controlled by the world, for its own pleasure. While convinced in
itself (through dialectical 'reasoning') it is doing wonderful things
"in the name of the Lord" it is instead a 'church' where iniquity
abounds, it is a 'church' which excommunicates (with and without writ)
any and all who hold it accountable to that righteousness which
can only come from God above, it is a 'church' which can not comprehend
living according to the "will of God" (righteousness)
alone without tolerating and incorporating "the lust of men" (sensuousness,
i.e. "enjoyment") as well, below. It is an apostate, adulterous, and whorish
(wicked) 'church,' lusting after the things of the world "in the name
of the Lord." Any redeemed within it must "come out" from
it for their souls sake. The "approval of man" (the "group hug")
is intoxicating and will drag all who embrace it into damnation.
The "separation of church and state" debate made it where
today the church (of righteousness) is not in the world because
the world (of sensuousness) is in the church. While the
church is to be in the world, the church is not to be of
the world. Put another way, while the church is to be in the
state, the state is not to be in the church. Even Karl Marx
understood this truth: When the church―the
herald of righteousness, is no longer preaching and
teaching righteousness in the state (as it is now 'driven'
with the
'purpose' of "getting along," i.e. being "respected" in the eyes of the
world, i.e. making Christianity "enjoyable" to both lost and
saved) then the state―the herald of
sensuousness (the "approval of man") is in control of the
church. Therefore, when the state (of sensuousness) is in
the church (of righteousness), both state and church become
Godless with only man, i.e. "human relationship" becoming god ("godliness
without God"). A person from then on, while being allowed to
worship God in private (keeping God out of the state), can no longer
preach and teach righteousness ("propagandize" God,
i.e. promote "hate") in the state―a
major platform of the "former" USSR constitution. A 'moment' of
silent pray (for the sake of social unity, i.e. "getting along" with
everyone else) in a room full of 'diverse' gods, is a 'moment' of
Godlessness, with man, i.e. "human relationship" becoming god.
This is what "Education Nation" is all about: education (and
this nation) no longer being about righteousness, i.e. God and
His creation, but rather being about sensuousness, i.e. man and
his world. "Education Nation" is of
the "new" world order, with the "old" world order of "top-down"
(with God above judging man below, i.e. righteousness judging
sensuousness) being replaced with the "new" world order of
"equality of opportunity" (with God and man becoming as one as "God"
takes on the "image of man," i.e. as "God" becomes progressively more
"tolerant of deviancy," i.e. more in "tune" with sensuousness,
i.e. more "enjoyment" oriented)
with more "equality of opportunity" for the "educated" (those
"tolerant of deviancy") than for the righteous―those, i.e. the
righteous that is, who for righteousness sake, can not
participate in the "special opportunity" of becoming
(along with the world) at-one-with "God," i.e. the "God" of man's
making that is, i.e. made in his sensuous image. In this way, "Education Nation" removes righteousness
as an issue of life, making it only an option (an "unhealthy" option)
of the "uneducated." The sad thing is, the "contemporary" church
is proselytizing (prostituting) the true church with the same
'driving purpose,' that 'purpose' being, that both church and state
might 'emerge' as one under the banner of
"human relationship building." Instead of building upon
the foundation of the righteousness of Christ it is now building
upon the foundation of the sensuous relationship of man with man.
I realize few will struggle to read all the way through this
article, wading through it's 'redundancies' (for it is painfully
redundant―the redundancy is like breathing
though,
i.e. enduring to the last breath in this life, living in the Lords
righteousness no matter what comes your way, constantly being
confronted by and warned of the ways of the world, while the pain comes in
the awareness of how wicked your wickedness really is and the increasing
awareness of how it, i.e. wickedness, pervades the world you love and
live within, and how deceivable you really are when left to your wicked
ways and the wicked ways of the world), but for those who endure
reading through this article, it will confirm the 'madness,' rather
the evilness of the days to come as being simply the 'purification' of the
dialectical process, a process being put into social praxis not
only in government, but also in the workplace, education, and even the
church. It is a
process which was first put into practice
or action (over and against righteousness)
in the garden in Eden. That first dialectical experience ended (or
rather was restrained for a time) with a flood, then again restrained at
a tower called Babel, the next time it will end in
fire. All men will stand (or rather kneel) before the Lord and be held accountable
(except the redeemed) for
their participation in its agenda which is the negation of that
righteousness which can only come from God above.
Most people want me to speak on how the dialectical process
is being used to 'change' education, the workplace, government, and even
the church and how to respond to it (emotionally and
intellectually in a way so as not to loose the "respect of men"), but they do not want me to speak on
the real reason for the use of the process and the only solution to
overcoming its use, righteousness. From the response that I receive from most
"conservatives," i.e. "Christians" wanting to talk about anything under the sun
except righteousness (after having just heard me speak on the
dialectic process and its agenda to negate righteousness
in education, in the workplace, in government and even in the church)
those who have used the dialectical process to produce 'change' (the
negation of righteousness) seem to have been very
successful. By treating my teaching on righteousness as
being 'irrelevant,' when it comes to solving social-political problems
(giving it lip service at the most), they reveal that they perceive
those who preach and teach righteousness as the only
solution to social-political problems as being 'irrational,' which
is the way people think when they have been dialectically processed
("educated")―that
is wanting
the "approval" of men (sensuousness) more than the
approval of God (righteousness), i.e. "educated" in dialectical
'reasoning,' trying to make that which is above, God's will (which is righteousness)
subject to (in servitude to) to that which is below, man's will, thus making
both man and God in hegemony to
sensuousness (making that righteousness, which is God alone,
'irrational' to the mind of man and thus 'irrelevant' in man's actions
to 'change' world).
What they never teach you in the university is that the
dialectical process has only one 'purpose,' righteousness, that is, how to negate it in the
life of the individual and annihilate it in the actions (praxis)
of the community.
Those who praxis the dialectic process must exclude (negate-annihilate)
righteousness as the only solution to personal-social
problems because it is righteousness which prevents them from
using the dialectic process in initiating and sustaining control over
the people who are within their sphere of influence (for their own
sensuous gain). Throughout this article I provide many
quotations from dialectic thinkers, Hegel, Marx, Maslow, Rogers, et
cetera, which will make their agenda, i.e.
the negation and annihilation of righteousness,
very clear.
You can not
explain, much less understand the dialectical process, without first
knowing that it "moves and has its being" for only one 'purpose,' the
negation of righteousness. Why bring it up, recognize
it, or exonerate it as being a solution, much less the only
solution (righteousness that is), when it is the very thing you
have to negate to be "normal," i.e. to be "human"? (This is
the reason inalienable rights―rights which
society, i.e. socialists can not change, and 'human rights'―rights
which are adaptable to 'change' as socialists perceive how
societies, i.e. socialists needs are 'changing,' are anathema to one
another.) By not making righteousness
the foundation for your communication, i.e. not bringing it up
when it can cause personal-social disharmony, you have negated it
in your mind (personal) and annihilated it in your actions
(social), you have done diaprax, i.e. you have put the dialectical process ("theory
and practice") into social action (praxis). We
do it ("Hegel's" A plus -A = A formula, i.e. diaprax) every time we
don't share the truth (especially when the Lord is leading us to do
so) because we might lose something "enjoyable" by doing so.
For example: we fear suffering the loss of relationship with
others we "enjoy" being around, i.e. losing their "respect" by
"damaging" their "enjoyment" of being around us because we hurt
their feelings, causing contention over something they naturally (sensually)
want to do or have (something they had 'rationally justified' in
themselves in doing or having until we made them "feel guilty," i.e.
"judged" them). Righteousness has a way of doing this in
an environment of sensuousness and human 'reasoning,' that
is, "messing up" human relationships.
Righteousness is a matter of eternal importance to you
and to God (God being eternally
righteous and eternal
life). Righteousness and
eternal life can only be imputed by God to you (through
Christ). It can not be "self-actualized" by you or any man (although
the unrighteous man might not agree). Righteousness can not
be "experientially" known (come into being through "cosmic"
consciousness), i.e. through sensuousness and human
'reasoning,' i.e. through "sense experience" (other than by
hearing the word of God in faith), it can only be known through
faith, belief, obedience, and chastening―righteousness
is not of the creation, of man, of human nature, it is only of the creator, of God. If you seek
to attain and maintain 'righteousness' and 'life' in the "here-and-now," by basing
'righteousness' (which correlates with
having a "guiltless" or "readily adaptable to change"
'conscience,' i.e. a super-ego―a "seared conscience") upon your ability to
determine 'good' and 'evil' between
yourself and your fellow man and the world, you can not receive
righteousness from God,
righteousness based upon His eternal nature, i.e. spiritual,
perfect, and holy (which he requires of you, which condemns you,
creating within you a "guilty conscience").
Basing 'righteousness' upon your own sensuousness,
i.e. your nature, your 'reasoning' abilities will always 'drive' you into
using the
dialectical process (using inductive 'reasoning') for
"self-environmental 'justification.'" Sensuousness
'justified' by human 'reasoning' is 'righteousness' without (thus
establishing itself over and against) the
righteousness of God. You can only
receive the
Lord's
righteousness by having faith in Him, through His revealed Word―using
the didactic procedure
(deductive reasoning), where justification can only be found in a
higher authority not influenced by, controlled by, or of the "self-environmental," sensuousness
based 'moment.'
While righteousness itself can only be
found in the Lord God Almighty
it is replicated as a system within the world, i.e. a system of Righteousness or
a paradigm―more specifically a patriarchal paradigm
(a right-wrong, top-down way of thinking and acting) where the
patriarchal parent, teacher, boss, etc establish what is right and what
is wrong (in thought and in action) for those under their authority. As long as
you are under authority which requires of you faith, belief,
obedience, and uses chastening when necessary, or you are in
a position of authority, demanding the same of those under you as is
demanded of you (all under God),
the system of Righteousness
prevails within your life. Interestingly humanism as well as evolution
is recognized as being a religion for this very same reason, their god
being man, i.e. human nature or nature itself, requiring faith (the 'facts' aren't in, what they have won't support their opinions,
i.e. the formula just isn't working the way they had hoped―or maybe it
is―i.e. why they have to lie, i.e. deny or distort the truth, i.e.
manipulate the facts to support their desired outcome―the
manipulation of people, i.e. "human resources," that is what you do with
"natural resources," isn't it, i.e. manipulate them―didn't you wake up
this morning saying "I just can't wait to be manipulated."), belief, obedience, and chastening
(chastening you through your lose of job or promotion or recognition if you don't agree
with them).
Evolution-humanism is all about sin, that is the
negation of it (by redefining it). God's judgment upon sin,
i.e. man's disobedience to His will, is no longer an
issue in the thoughts and actions of men. But rather man's
judgment is upon his own sin (sin being the alienation of man with man
and nature). Man's will to 'emerge' at-one-with the universe, via. the
pleasures of this world, is now the 'driving purpose' of life. Bring righteousness
into the 'discussion' and you will be "invited" out. You will be
chastened for not obeying the rules of godlessness or rather
"godliness without God."
A good example of the system of
Righteousness is Jesus requesting that John
the Baptist "suffer" him to be baptized of him "to fulfil all
righteousness," fulfilled all the conditions of the
system of Righteousness:
faith, belief, obedience, as well as the chastening of the
flesh, the flesh being made subject to faith, belief, obedience,
in the death, burial, and resurrection of baptism. In this same
way we are to take captive every thought to "the obedience of
Christ" (2 Corinthians 10:5)
who could do nothing apart from His Father's will, making himself subject
to all of the Father's commands. "I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and
my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the
Father which hath sent me." (John 5:30) "For I have not
spoken of myself; but the Father who sent me, he gave me commandment what I
should say, and what I should speak." (John 12:49)
The same system, under God, i.e. under our Heavenly Father, is required
of us. "For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is
in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother."
Matthew 12:50
While all religions carry a semblance of the systems of
Righteousness it can only be fulfilled in Christ (be in right order,
no longer engendered and controlled by the systems of
sensuousness and human 'reasoning'), with His Heavenly Father being the highest authority. "And call no man your father upon
the earth: for one is your father, which is in heaven."
Matthew 23:9 The semblance of the
system of Righteousness, the earthly family or religious
group still being 'driven' by sensuousness, i.e.
'purposed' in the augmentation of pleasure (Hebrews
12:5-11, vs. 10), is thus divided only for
one reason, for righteousness sake, i.e. accepting the Father
of Christ as being their only Father (with Christ being the Fathers only
begotten son), the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit being
righteousness alone (righteousness not being of man therefore having to
be imputed to man, i.e. only being attainable through faith in
Christ). Since righteousness is not of the creation, of
sensuousness, of sight, of man, of his opinions, of human
'reasoning' God must divide or separate a man from earthly institutions
by adopting him into His heavenly institution, i.e. transforming him
from being controlled by his sensuousness and 'reasoning'
abilities, i.e. being controlled by the creation, which condemns him, into finding life in His
righteousness, i.e. being directed by the Lord, which redeems him. "Think not that I am come to
send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am
come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter
against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.
And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth
father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth
son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not
his cross [the cross being social rejection], and followeth after
me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he
that loseth his life for my sake shall find it." "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 10:34-37, 32-33 bracketed information added In none
of this does Jesus disparage the patriarchal paradigm, i.e. the
system of Righteousness.
Man uses the dialectical process to 'liberate' himself from
the authority of the patriarchal parent, teacher, boss, etc. (negating
the system of Righteousness), replacing "thy will be
done" with "my will be done" transforming into "our will
be done." "What would my parents [or God] say" is replaced
with "what does it mean to me [or what does what I am
thinking or doing mean to "the group," "the village," the community,
society, etc.]?" (Carl Rogers, on
becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)
(The "Do as I say." "Because I said so." preaching and
teaching of the parents is replaced with the "I feel ...." and
"I
think ...." dialoguing of the children, where human
approval, i.e. the approval of being 'human,' i.e. "the pride of life"
now controls life, controls mans thoughts and actions―called "theory
and practice.")
By 'justifying' his 'rebellious' nature, his sensuousness, as
being 'righteous' ('normal' human behavior, common to all men as being
'good') in his own eyes, he 'liberates' himself not only from the
authority of the patriarchal parent, teacher, and boss, but also
'liberates' himself from the authority of God (His righteousness)
and negates, in his thoughts and in his actions any fear of God's
judgment upon him for his sins, for his 'normal' (wicked) human behavior―behavior which is based upon sensuousness (of a yin-yang, Taoistic nature, i.e. adaptable to 'change' in
'changing' times, i.e. man subject to the whims of the situation or to
the ways of man rather
than to the established ways of the Lord).
While the
system of
Righteousness applies to both the secular and the sacred realms
(both realms being subject to higher authority, under God),
righteousness itself can only be imputed by God.
Dialectical thought and action (theory and practice) is the
praxis of negating the latter (righteousness) by
negating the former (the system of Righteousness).
When 'reasoning' makes sensuousness equal with (but separate
from) righteousness
(Kant―“Hegel would never have found his
dialectical method without the transcendental dialectic
delineated in Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason.” Carl
Friedrich, The Philosophy of Hegel), 'reasoning' will always sides with sensuousness therefore
justifying sensuousness as being 'righteousness,' i.e.
positioning sensuousness over and against
righteousness (Hegel), thus 'justifying' the
negation-annihilation of righteousness through sensuous-'rational' social action―praxis
(Marx), i.e. consensus put into action (where 'truth' and "the
approval of men" become synonymous). This is the
dialectical pathway down which our dialectic minded legislators,
executors, and judiciary (and worst of all dialectically minded
ministers) have taken us.
When 'reasoning' makes
the child (of the system of sensuousness) equal with the
parent (of the system of Righteousness), 'reasoning'
justifies the child's "felt needs" (man above law) over and against parental authority
(law above man),
thus 'justifying' the negation-annihilation of parental authority
over the child through social action (through common-unity, i.e.
community participation, i.e.
communitarianism―lawlessness ruling as law). As the Pope usurps the authority of
God (circumvent the system of Righteousness under the
righteousness of God, i.e. having a form of the system of
Righteousness but denying the power of righteousness which is
of God only) by having his priests (through 'confessionals') attain the
sensuous needs of the 'religious' community (with the bishops
then compiling this information attained from the region) wherewithal he
is able to address the "felt" needs of the 'church' in the 'changing'
times, thus being perceived as the "all knowing," i.e. being in "touch"
with God and the people, guaranteeing the satisfaction of his own "felt"
needs―control over the masses to
sustain his own sensuous pleasures, so 'contemporary ministers'
do the same through their polls, surveys, feasibility studies, and
synergistic (soviet style) organizations. The same dialectic
(soviet―facilitated, diverse group,
dialoguing to consensus) method (turning principles and
beliefs into opinions and theories, i.e. where all "truth," even
"truth" preached and taught as revelation truth
when
it is not, is in actuality "truth" engendered from the dialoguing
of men's opinions engendered from their sensuous desires, to
initiate and sustain the process of 'change') is being used today in
government to influence and control the citizens and their duly elected
representatives.
Both the state and the 'church' today necessitate the
negation-annihilation of the patriarchal system (the patriarchal
paradigm) of the traditional family to initiate and sustain
their control over the "masses" (only giving the family lip service as a form,
when beneficial to the 'cause,' but
taking from the parents their power of authority to demand
from their children faith, belief, and obedience, with the
authority to chasten them when they are disobedient, all under God's
authority). All dialectic thinking and acting institutions, as you
will see, are contemptuous and hostile toward the traditional home
(despite their facade of "support"). The dialectical objective is
to accomplish this trickery (the negation-annihilation of the traditional
family through social programs and social actions disguised as protecting the
family, while, in reality protecting, i.e. 'liberating' the
individuals within it, i.e. the wife and the children from the fathers authority to rule) without being detected and blocked.
By focusing upon the "felt needs" of the children, i.e. their "felt
needs" which are common with the parents "felt needs," the parents
will abdicate their position of authority and follow after the now
liberated will of
the child, i.e. both parents and children thereafter following after
those who now direct (manipulate) the
child's liberated thoughts and actions.
Socialism, in any form (including "democracy"), is as much an act
against righteousness as it is an act against the traditional
family, with 'justification' from above being supplanted by
self-justification and social-justification becoming united below (it is, in
the end, not about your will or "our" will, it is all about the Father's
will, that is, the negation of it). The dialectic process
is all about destroying the father's authority over the family.
When the child's will is emancipated from the father's will, made
equal with (and thus over and against) the father's will, the traditional
(patriarchal) family is moribund, the dialectically liberated child now
being "unfit for the obedient role of the child in the family." (James Coleman, The
Adolescent Society)
Those who use the dialectical process, making the child's
will "equal" with the father's will, use their "newly" gained power over
and against the office of the father (an office promoting "honesty
and industry," of the system of righteousness) to initiate and sustain control of
his assets. Money represents stored up (potential) pleasure
(lovers of pleasure are lovers of money and lovers of money are lovers
of pleasure, controlling money augments the potential for pleasure)―the
"pride of life" is man's ability to control the environment for his own
pleasure, thus the "pride if life," the "love of money," and the "love
of pleasure" are all united within the human 'moment' of
'self-environment' justification.
Therefore by "the children of disobedience" (both young and old)
gaining access to and control over the father's money (over and against the fathers will―who
is now
under duress, forced to pay his taxes which are then used to undermine his
authority via federal-state regulations, offices, and departments
anathema of the patriarchal family system, i.e. hostel towards the system
of Righteousness), the initiators and sustainers of 'change'
('change' agents 'liberating' the children from the father's authority) gain access
to and control over the fathers money as well (and thus
gain control over the
family, the "village," the state, the nation, and the world)
through the children, guaranteeing to themselves a life of worldly pleasures
(something traditional, patriarchal fathers would not support or
"finance," i.e. would instead fight and chasten against if not
now 'fearful' of losing their families in doing so).
Socio-psychologists initiate and sustain their livelihood (a
life of sensuous pleasures) by initiating and sustaining
contention and misery within the traditional family. "Meyers in his study emphasizing group think, Higher
Horizons 1961, stated that 'to develop attitudes and values toward
learning which are not shaped by the parents' produces 'conflict and tension
between parents and children ... who
are not participating in the special opportunities." "… objectives
can best be attained where the individual is separated from earlier
environmental conditions and when he is in association with a group
of peers who are changing in much the same direction and who thus
tend to reinforce each other." (David Krathwohl,
Benjamin Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational
Objectives: Book II Affective Domain―a
popular book used in training teachers) By their
praxis of 'liberating' children from parental authority, i.e.
'liberating' the child's will from the father's will, i.e. making them
equal in praxis, they engender a "new" world order (out of the
"will" of the children, out of the system of sensuousness),
over and against the "old" world order (which was subject to the will of
the fathers, of the system of Righteousness―dad
and mom are not perfect but their office is), they guarantee
themselves ("the children of disobedience," both young and old) a
life of worldly pleasures, freed of a 'guilty' conscience―a
"new" world order dialectically 'liberated' from the
restraints of the system
of Righteousness.
While God says "rule," "occupy," "endure," and "stand, having
done all to continue standing" in His righteousness―a
patriarchal construct or paradigm or way of feeling, thinking, and
acting of 'everlastingness' (standing upon
a solid rock)―sensuous
man "takes control over," conquers," 'changes' the environment for the
'goodness' of himself and others (to augment his sensuousness of
pleasure) not realizing that it is the
environment, i.e. his lust for it, which has taken control of him,
resulting in a heresiarchal construct
or paradigm or way of feeling, thinking, and acting of
'changingness' (where man is continuously wandering about upon
the ever 'shifting'
sands of his "felt" needs, ever 'driven' by the environment). The peace that passes understanding, which is of
God's righteousness (unchanging, established forever), can only come through the
chastening of that 'peace' which comes through human 'reasoning,' which is
of man's sensuousness (ever changing, never satisfied―ever
seeking after those things of the world which stimulate dopamine
emancipation, i.e. the wanting of gratifying objects of the world).
While contentment and peace are established in
righteousness they are never truly initiated or sustained in sensuousness,
although to fallen man they might "seem to" be for the
'moment.' "There is no peace, saith
the LORD, unto the wicked." "The way of peace they know not; and there
is no judgment in their goings: they have made them crooked paths:
whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace." Isaiah 48:22;
59:8 "Wherefore doth the wicked contemn God? he hath said in
his heart, Thou wilt not require it ["He will never see it,"
vs. 11]." Psalms 10:13 Thus man, in order to
"rule" over the world in his own sensuousness and 'reasoning'
abilities (blinded by―thus blind to―his
own wickedness) must, through the process of 'change,' remove (negate)
the righteousness of God from his thoughts and his actions
(remove the righteousness of God from his "sense perception:"
internally, by imagining what he can be "if only...," and externally, by focusing upon
only that which the 'natural' environment provides) in order to create a "new" world order
where he can perceive himself as being, like God, 'righteous' in and of
himself―freeing himself from any
guilt (from having a "guilty conscience") for his praxis
of disobedience toward God, which to him, is no longer an issue of
importance (being no longer "relevant" to man's praxis of
individual-social-environmental unity).
While God
is glorified in His creation (ruling over it in His righteousness)
man glorifies himself in his ability to 'change' it ('changing' it
through
his own 'reasoning' abilities so that he can control it for his own
sensuous pleasures).
Only when man becomes conscious of himself (self-conscious), cognizant of his dissatisfaction
with righteousness restraining sensuousness, does he have the
potential for 'change,' does he have the potential for taking control of his own life and the
lives of others (the world in actuality taking control of him).
By using his own 'reasoning' abilities (by dialectical 'reasoning') he can liberate his sensuousness
from the restraints of righteousness and then in his 'rational'-sensual action
(revolution and evolution) liberate himself from the consciousness of God (negating
righteousness, fixity, by the theory and practice of
sensuousness, 'changingness'), glorifying himself as being
'creator,' rather than God.
This is the diabolical pathway of dialectical thinking and
acting (theory
and practice) where man, in his "wisdom" and his strength (in his
own sensuousness and 'reasoning' ability), initiates and sustains
his own kingdom, a kingdom of his own nature, perceiving his
unrighteousness as being 'righteousness' ("sensuous-'felt' needs"
satisfied through social action, initiating
and sustaining social unity―the way of Antichrist), thus 'necessitating' the
negation-annihilation of God's kingdom, that kingdom which is
only of His righteousness (Christ),
negating-annihilating the
kingdom (of righteousness) which is the source of alienation and social disharmony.
For example: while
God says:
"And what concord [harmony] hath Christ with Belial? Or what
part hath he that believeth with an infidel?" (2 Corinthians
6:15), man says: "Alienation has a
long history. Its most radical sense already appears in the
biblical expulsion from Eden." God is thus the anthropological
source of alienation" (Stephen Eric Bronner, Critical Theorists
and their Theory). Thus man, glorifying himself in his own
works, i.e. in his own 'reasoning' abilities, chooses Caesar (man―sensuousness)
rather than the Lord (God―righteousness). "We have no king but
Caesar." John 19:15 When man rules over sin, i.e. when he
tries to control the world, he becomes a servant to sin, i.e. he is
controlled by the world, and, like Cane, must kill the righteous,
to 'justify' his newly created kingdom built upon "self-esteem."
While God divides between sensuousness and
righteousness man unites 'righteousness' with sensuousness,
making them one through human 'reasoning,' via. his use of the
dialectical process. " But we all, with open face
beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same
image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord."
2 Corinthians 3:18 By looking upon man and his 'glory' we
remain in his image (sensuous and wicked) but by looking upon
"the glory of the Lord" we are changed "by the Spirit of the
Lord" into his image (righteous and holy).
To mingle the two, God's
righteousness (that which is above) with man's sensuousness
(that which is below) creates confusion, thus making it easier for
'change' agents,' the seducers, deceivers, and manipulates
of 'change,' to facilitate their diabolical process of 'change'
negating-annihilating righteousness. It is only by
means of dialectical 'reasoning' that the antithesis of righteousness
and sensuousness, the duality of (and conflict between)
consciousness and self-consciousness can be overcome (synthesized),
according to dialectical thinkers (humanists―where
the essence of man is found in man alone, i.e. in human nature alone).
The tension between righteousness and sensuousness can
only be negated-annihilated through human 'reasoning,'
influenced and guided by sensuousness, and sensuousness,
influenced and guided by human 'reasoning,' both being put into social
action (praxis)―social action
over and against righteousness. Diaprax is Kant's equalization of
righteousness and sensuousness (with 'reasoning' on the side
of sensuousness), sensuousness and 'reasoning' synthesized
by Hegel, being put into Marx's social action (praxis)
negating righteousness ("equality of
opportunity" in the garden in Eden was man become as gods―becoming
'righteous' in his own eyes he negated righteousness)―with man
becoming himself as he progressively, collectively, 'rationally,'
'liberates' himself from that which is not of his nature,
i.e. God―resulting in "godliness without God." "This
know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For
men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud,
blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural
affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers
of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures
more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the
power thereof: from such turn away."
2 Timothy 3:1-4 emphasis added As will be
explained, the negation of righteousness through dialectal
'reasoning' (human reasoning) leads to a people who are no longer guided
by their conscience, resulting in a people who are easily
seduced, deceived, and manipulated (through their sensuous
'reasoning' abilities) into doing unconscionable things, a people of
"consciousness without the conscience," a people "ever learning
but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."
I am, not because I think, but, because God
says I AM. To think otherwise, i.e. to think "I am because
I think" (Descartes), i.e. to question what is, is to negate-annihilate
righteousness. It is God, the creator, who gives us
validation, not our awareness of ourselves in the light of His creation
and our reasoning-physical (psycho-motor) ability to 'change' it for our
own 'good,' for our own 'purpose,' for our own pleasure. (While the
"light" of the creation, i.e. the creation and its order, i.e. its laws,
might make me aware that there is a God, it is only by the light of the
gospel that I can come to know Him as He IS.)
It is His righteousness (that which is from above), not my
sensuousness and 'reasoning' abilities (that which is of the
world below), which gives me life. All mankind, all who are of
the world below, i.e. who remain in their unrighteousness, i.e. without
Christ, are simply the "dead walking." Every breath that a man
takes is a temporary gift of life from God to man for his time on the
earth, only to end with his last breath, his eternal life whether it be
in heaven, in the Lords peace, joy, and love or in hell, in torment and
anguish, being determined by
God, judging him according to his thoughts and actions, whether they
were in servitude to the sensuousness of the world (uniting him
with the world through sight) or directed by the will of the Father
(made possible by the righteousness of Christ being imputed by
Christ to men of faith in Him), while in this earthy,
sensuous world. To attempt to validate God through my
thoughts and my actions (through sensuousness) is to invalidate
the righteousness of God, which can only be known through hearing
His word and having faith in Him (in His Word alone). In such an
attempt, my feeling and thoughts, guided by my "sense perception," will
negate-annihilate the righteousness of God as being the only
way of life. To confuse the two, making both righteousness
and sensuousness equally good, of equal value (which only
makes them appear to be equal but separate since righteousness―God,
can never consider itself―Himself,
as being equal with sensuousness―with
man), is to negate-annihilate the righteousness of God
(who alone is good) and exonerate the sensuousness and
'reasoning' abilities of man. Thus in the group experience
(the "youth group" included), where feelings and thoughts are
'liberated' (focused upon as being common to all) for the purpose of
building social harmony/unity, building human relationships, the
righteousness of God (which condemns all men as being wicked, that
is, all men who are not living under His authority, not walking
according to "His will," i.e. living and walking in His Word and by the
power of His Spirit only) is (must be) negated-annihilated.
To suspend righteousness, even for a 'moment' is to
negate it. When the suspension of righteousness
is 'justified,' negation annihilates it. To
set aside, suspend, righteousness in the social human
'moment,' in the praxis of 'discovering' common feelings and
common thoughts (common-ism), for the 'purpose' of initiating and
sustaining social unity (common-ism), is to praxis the
negation-annihilation of righteousness as being the only
way of life (why Billy Graham and others of like mind end up saying that
there are many different ways to God―to
believe that there are many different ways is to negate-annihilate
belief in the only way). Thus that unity,
which is a byproduct of righteousness, which is of God (from
above alone) is replaced with that unity which is of, by, and for man,
that which it is of his sensuousness, from below.
The fruit of the Spirit, God's love, can only come from above, is
eternal, is of the creator, pure, holy, righteous. The
fruit of the flesh, man's love, can only come from below, is temporal,
is of the creation, sensuous. To
mingle the two, as being equal in value, is to create chaos and
confusion, leading to a dialectical outcome of humanism, socialism, i.e.
the negation of that which is from above (righteousness:
of the right-wrong, i.e. either-or duality) by that which is from below
(sensuousness: of the pain-pleasure, i.e. more-less
spectrum/continuum/plurality). Unless a person
repents before God, i.e. repents before He who is from above, repents for his
praxis, i.e. repents for his participation within the dialectical process,
i.e. repents for 'justifying' himself, i.e. 'justifying' that which is below over
and against that which is above, he can not know the righteousness
of God and eternal life, both of which are imputed to men of faith in Christ
alone, through Christ alone ("before Abraham was, I AM" John 8:38-59―restoring
man to His Father, the "I AM that I AM").
To separate the Son from the Father ("Thy will be done on earth as
it is in Heaven.") is to separate righteousness
from God, making man (sensuousness without the law, i.e. man's
will) equal with God (righteousness
in law, i.e. God's will)―this is the great deception and the great falling away.
Jesus came to 'fulfill' the law of the Father to restore man to the
Father (to do the Fathers will in the Lords righteousness alone) not negate it to free man from the Father
(so that man can to do his own will of sensuousness, in the name
of the Lord). The law
is still in effect, doing what it is supposed to do, condemning all who
reject that righteousness which can only come through
Christ Jesus. The law of righteousness―the
law fulfilled in Christ alone and its righteousness imputed by
Christ to men of faith in Him alone―makes
available to all men (who are willing to believe in Him alone) being the only
way to the Father (restoring man to the will of the Father, i.e. to
"Thy will be done ...").
Sensuous man is deceived in his believing that the dialectical
process has a 'good' side (a "positive" side). That it can be used to acquire contentment
and peace (leisure and guaranteed sustenance, beauty and
'liberty'). He only sees the 'bad'
side (the "negative" side) of the dialectical process, i.e.
seeing the 'bad side of being 'emancipated,'
'liberated,' 'self-environmental justified' from the restraints of
righteousness, that is ugliness and
bondage (the fruit of wickedness) when it is too late. By 'justifying' his "new" paradigm
(sensuousness and 'reasoning' united in social action) as being 'right'
(or more 'right' than 'wrong')
man classifies the "old" paradigm
(righteousness restraining sensuousness and 'reasoning') as being 'wrong,' irrational, unreal, out of touch with
the 'changing' times, out of touch with "human needs" etc.
What
happened in the garden in Eden (Genesis
3) was the first praxis of 'emancipation,' 'liberation,', 'self justification'
of man, the first praxis of man 'rationally' (dialectically)
'justifying' his sensuousness and 'reasoning' abilities, over and against the
righteousness of God. By making his sensuous feelings
and his sensuous thoughts the foundation for defining 'reality,'
his sense based opinions became the measure of what is good and
what is evil, thus placing him over and against God and His Word, over
and against His will, over and against His righteousness.
While 'liberty,' for the carnal man, is found in the
'liberation' of sensuousness from the restraints of
righteousness (where "wishy-washy" man will sell his soul and all
that is right, i.e. all that is his to rule over under God, for the
temporary-'changing,' more or less, i.e. "more pleasure-less pain" of
the 'moment'), true liberty can only be found in the permanent either-or
of righteousness (where man is freed from the confusion, fear,
manipulation, and control which sensuousness engenders, and which
those of the system of 'reasoning' perpetrate).
Only in the system of Righteousness does "give me
liberty or give me death" have any true and lasting meaning.
While revolutionaries (of the dialectic variety) might use the phrase,
they are not really defending that which is theirs to defend, including
life (although they may claim that as their 'purpose'), but rather they
are taking that which is not theirs to take, including life (which they
may claim is their 'right,' since they perceive that all the world, and
all its pleasures, is theirs to take, i.e. theirs to control, i.e.
theirs to 'liberate'―that
man might no longer be under the authority of a God who judges man
eternally for "doing his own thing" in the "here-and-now."
In dialectical 'reasoning' there are no personal, individual
rights apart from universal, social 'rights.' Liberty is
only found in social life (in the "universal"), not in individual life
(in the "particular") alone. 'Liberty,' for the unrighteous man,
is being 'free' to pursue that which is of his own nature and
nature alone (which is individual-social in nature only), i.e. freed
from having to have faith in, believe upon, obey
and be chastened by that which is not of his own nature and
nature alone (where the individual, and
thus the world, is to be under God's authority alone). According
to dialectical 'reasoning,' when man's nature (and nature itself)
is freed from the restraints of righteousness, i.e. when he is
'free' to pursue the sensuousness of the pleasure of this world
only (along with, i.e. in consensus with all men), he is 'uninhibited,'
'rational,' 'educated,' and 'healthy.' Liberty, for the
righteous man, is being free to pursue God alone, i.e. freed
from the controlling attributes of his own nature and thus
freed from those who would use them (by controlling, i.e.
manipulating the environment) to seduce, deceive, and
manipulate him (use him) for theirs (and his) worldly pleasures only.
According to dialectical 'reasoning,' when man's nature (and
nature itself) is restrained by righteousness, i.e. when man is
no longer 'free' to pursue the sensuousness of the pleasure of
this world only (along with, i.e. in consensus with all men), he is
'repressed,' 'neurotic,' 'uneducated,' and 'unhealthy.'
“The essence of man is not an abstraction inherent in each
particular individual.” (Karl Marx, Thesis on Feuerbach # 6)
Marx declared that there is no eternal soul in man, that man is not
created in the image of God and therefore is not accountable to Him for
his thoughts and actions. “The real nature of man is the
totality of social relations." ibid. Marx therefore
declared that: as man 're-creates' himself in the image of society (by
participating with it in the praxis of negating the image
of God within himself, i.e. negating that which is not of his own
nature, which is common to all nature, i.e. all mankind), he is, from
then on, only accountable to society (to nature) for his thoughts and
his actions. “It is not individualism that fulfills the
individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society is the
necessary framework through which freedom and individuality are made
realities.” (Karl Marx) He declares that: without
the aid of social intervention the individual will remain isolated
("destroyed"), and therefore remain subject to that which is not of
nature, i.e. subject to that which is not in common with his own nature
(subject to sensuous only). “Only within a social context individual man is able
to realize his own potential as a rational being.” (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's
Philosophy of Right) Only within the realm of
"education" (re-education)―"Education
Nation―where the individual is subjected to dialectical
'reasoning' in a social setting (not in a group of individuals but
rather in a "social" group environment void of the restraints of
righteousness), does man have the "potential" of become a
"rational being." “The
individual is emancipated in the social group.” (Norman O.
Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of
History) Freud, although he worked on individuals outside
the group setting, did not perceive of man as being an isolated
individual subject to something or someone not of "the species."
“Individual psychology is thus in itself group psychology ... the
individual ... is an archaic identity with the species.” “This archaic heritage
bridges the ‘gap between individual and mass psychology.’” (Freud,
Moses and Monotheism in Herbart Marcuse, Eros and
Civilization: a philosophical inquiry into Freud) "Self-actualizing people have to a large extent
transcended the values of their culture. They are not so
much merely Americans as they are world citizens, members of
the human species first and foremost." (Abraham Maslow,
The Further Reaches of Human Nature) "One of the most fascinating aspects of group
therapy is that everyone is born again, born together in the group."
(Irvine D. Yalom, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy)
Only within the "social" group setting (in a dialectical environment)
can man 'discover,' 'emancipate,' and 'actualize' his true identity
('discover,' 'emancipate' and 'actualize' his "social" image, thereby
freeing himself from the "image of God"). “The more of himself man attributes to God, the less
he has left in himself.” “The only practically possible
emancipation is the unique theory which holds that man is the supreme
being for man.” (Karl Marx, Selected Reading in Sociology and
Social Philosophy by T. B. Bottomore) “The life which he has
given to the object sets itself against him as an alien and hostile force.”
(Karl Marx, MEGA I/3) Without the 'help' of the master facilitator
in the garden in Eden, man would have forever remained in the image of
God, unable to 'rationally' discover his sensuous identity with
the world and therefore 'rationally' justify his nature as being
at-one-with it. This is the praxis of Marx, of Diaprax, of
Genesis 3:1-6, of Lucifer, man liberating himself from "an alien and
hostile force," i.e. dialectically liberating himself from God, to
be god himself, i.e. a god of his own sensuous nature, made in
his own image. “A
logical connection emerges with the anthropological perspective of the
young Marx wherein ‘the eye becomes the human eye, the ear the human
ear.’” (Erich Fromm, Marx’s Concept of Man)
Man is therefore, in dialectical 'reasoning,' not created in
the image of God (subject to His righteousness) but rather is to
be 'recreated' in the image of society (subject to his and its ways of
sensuousness and 'reasoning' united as one). Without
becoming aware of the restraining nature of the first image (the
antithesis between righteousness and sensuousness) and
'rationally' transcending it ('rationally' going beyond the antithesis
condition caused by righteousness) he can not be transformed into
the latter image (of sensuousness and 'reasoning' united), i.e.
become as he really is, carnal (sensual, 'rational') only.
Therefore, if it is so natural for man to sin, why fight that which is
natural? "Not feeling at home in the sinful world [in a
world preaching and teaching righteousness], Critical
Criticism [the dialectical thinker, i.e. the "higher order
thinker" in morals and ethics] must set up a sinful world in its own
home ['rationally' make sensuousness the only way of life]."
(Karl Marx, The Holy Family) By 'rationally,'
"intellectually" finding consensus (at-oneness) with nature, i.e.
using his own 'reasoning' abilities ("higher order thinking skills) to
identify and thus transcend that which is not of his nature, he can
'rationally' transcend the issue of sin itself. "I'm OK." "Your
OK." "If it feels good, just do it." "Can't we all just get along?"
"Boys will be boys." "No Fear." "Make love, not war." etc. therefore
becomes the language of society. This is where Hegel, Marx, Freud,
and all who like them,
i.e. thinking dialectically, join "hand in hand," that is, join
sensually and 'rationally' together in the negation,
within the individual, and the annihilation, within society, of
righteousness having anything to do with the issues of life and
death―other than being perceived and
responded to as an 'unhealthy' condition from which man is to
collectively and 'rationally' "emancipate," "liberate," "change" himself
and society from, via. social praxis.
When man removes God's hedge of protection (His righteousness),
he, through his 'reasoning' abilities, falls victim to the wolves of
unrighteousness, falls victim to their agenda of 'change'―their
agenda of 'changing' him into their own image of seduction,
deception, and manipulation, 'changing' him into becoming a
facilitator of 'change,' a "minister of righteousness"
himself―which
is really unrighteousness. "For such are false apostles,
deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as
the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their
works." 2 Corinthians 11:13-15 I remember, during
the Vietnam War, seeing many young men go into ministry to avoid being
drafted, thereby carrying their wicked (unrepentant) ways with them into
church leadership whereby they were able to victimize the innocent and
unwary with their dialectical sensuous 'reasoning' abilities
(self-social justification). This was about the time that church
"youth groups" exploded upon the scene.
Justification is either founded upon God's
righteousness (which is life) or man's sensuousness and
'reasoning' (the end thereof being death). There is no
in-between the two. There is no spectrum, continuum, or gradient
between righteousness and sensuousness, as many would
deceive you into believing, only to
betray you in the end. The spectrum
is only found within sensuousness (of the flesh), subject to a
gradation between pain and pleasure with man approaching pleasure and
avoiding pain being the highest 'good,' making 'good' (and thus 'evil') subject to
sensuousness, i.e. the 'good' day being of more pleasure than pain.
Righteousness instead is only of God, i.e. to break one part of
the law is to break all of it (which is the same rule applied to the
laws of nature, i.e. to ignore a law of nature, for example gravity, can
kill you even if you get the rest, i.e. drag, thrust, lift, right, i.e.
being more 'right' than 'wrong' in the field of science can kill you).
That which is of God, righteousness, is not of man,
sensuousness. Apart from God's righteousness man is
unrighteous, his 'reasoning' therefore being only subject to his
sensuousness (basing 'righteousness,' good and evil, right and
wrong, upon the spectrum of sensuousness, thus deceiving himself
and taking pleasure while doing it to others, i.e. 'justifying' his
deception by basing righteousness upon a pain-pleasure spectrum).
Thus reasoning must be made subject of righteousness (absolutes)
or it will be used to 'justify' sensuousness (relativism). God's
love and righteousness require the chastening of man's flesh
(reprimanding sensuousness), i.e. restraining it, making
sensuousness subject to righteousness (where opinions are
made subject to truth which is preached and taught), while
man's love and 'righteousness' require the liberation of man's flesh
(augmenting sensuousness), i.e. encouraging it, making
'righteousness' subject to sensuousness (where truth is made
subject to opinions which are dialogued).
What wolves in
sheep skin, hirelings, the prodigal son's friends, councilors,
facilitators, 'change' agents, philosophers, psychiatrists, socialists,
contemporary "ministries," etc. all have in common is that they will all
help you in satisfying your "felt needs" (sensuousness), i.e. they "care" about you,
until they run out of your money or you are no longer beneficial or
satisfying to their sensuous "need" (serve the perception of
others of their being beneficial to them), whereupon, unlike family,
they will leave you to your own hopeless, miserable demise. Like
the scriptural account of the prodigal son, it's not about you or your
friends' "love" for you and the things or people of this world―sensuousness,
it is about the Father's love for you―righteousness).
Most people, when they don't like (or don't have anything to
"gain" from) the 'bad' side of the dialectical process (which is totalitarian
control―the consequence of dialectical
praxis), only want to stop its 'bad' side from oppressing them, wanting
to keep the sensuous pleasures of its 'good' side in place, not
knowing it is the 'good' side ("the justification of self"
and "the approval of man,"
both based upon the sensuousness of dialectical 'reasoning,' i.e.
man 'reasoning' from his own sensuousness, 'reasoning' from that which is of his nature
only, i.e. to
"approach pleasure and avoid pain," with the augmentation of pleasure―the
controlling of the environment to satiate the wanting of gratifying
objects which lie within it, which is never
satisfied―"Hell and destruction are never full;
so the eyes of man are never satisfied." Proverbs 27:20―which includes not only the desire to "survive,"
placing hope in this
world of sensuousness, but also the desire for "the approval of
men," placing hope in sensuous man himself―both
being the 'drive' and the 'purpose' of life) which is the catalyst for
the 'bad' side, i.e. (totalitarianism).
Being indifferent to the effect which the "bad" side of the process has
upon others, because of the benefits the "good" side has for you, is
just as much an act of violence as the act of hate itself.
Like Esau, man has sold his birth-right of righteousness and
eternal life (both given by God, who desires that none be lost, making
both, i.e. righteousness and eternal life now attainable, through faith in Him, through
believing upon and trusting in His only begotten Son),
rejected them (and Him) for the pleasures ('momentary' sensuousness)
of this world (man leaning instead upon his own sense based
'reasoning' for
understanding―cursing God and his blessing
of eternal life, because of his love for the pleasures of this life,
which ends in eternal death).
By dialectical 'reasoning' man has rejected that which can only come
from God (righteousness and life)
and has therefore embraced that which is only of his own nature (sensuousness
and death), that which is of the world, that which man can
commonly, collectively relate with―his knowledge and his understanding
being darkened, void of the knowledge and understanding of righteousness which can only
begin with the fear of the Lord.
"For
there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; neither hid, that
shall not be known. Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in
darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have spoken in
the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops. And I
say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and
after that have no more that they can do. But I will forewarn you
whom ye shall fear: fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to
cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, fear him." Luke 12:2-5
Fallen
man, for the sake of sustaining the 'good' side of the process, i.e.
"the pleasures of this world" (controlling his own life in the
augmentation of pleasure) refuses to recognize that his
participation within the process (controlling the environment for
the 'purpose' of initiating and sustaining worldly pleasures) is itself evil
(letting the environment control, i.e. influence him into 'rationally'
determining what is 'good' and what is 'evil' based upon his own carnal
nature). Thus, refusing
to recognize his participation within the process (using it for 'good') as
being evil, he refuse to see himself as being wicked (having sensuous
eyes he can not see himself for what he is, wicked). It is only
when a person comes to see the wickedness of his own heart (in the light of
God's Word, in the light of His righteousness) that he can
come to understand the wickedness of the dialectical process and its
diabolical effect upon himself and the world he lives within.
Today no university professor (or university) can expose the
dialectical process for what it is―wicked―and
be recognized by his pears and the university as being right.
Martin Luther noted in his day that universities had become wide gates
to Hell because "... they teach not Christ but human reasoning. . .
Woe to these lost and dreadful men of Sodom and Gomorrah!" "Miserable Christians, whose words and faith
still depend on the interpretations of men and who expect clarification from
them! This is frivolous and ungodly. The Scriptures are common to all, and are
clear enough in respect to what is necessary for salvation and are also obscure
enough for inquiring minds. . . let us reject the word of man." (Martin
Luther, Luther's Works)
"Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about
them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and
going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering
the vengeance of eternal fire. Likewise also these filthy dreamers
defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities."
Jude 7, 8
An understanding of the dialectical process can not come
through an academic exercise in the "reasoning's" of Socrates,
Heraclitus, Plato, Aristotle, Hegel, Marx, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche,
Lenin, Lukács, Gramsci, Freud, Adorno, Moreno, Lewin (having taught in a
university―lecturing on the subject
of the dialectical process and its effect upon the American culture―I
dedicating one three hour class on Kurt Lewin alone because his work on
"group dynamics," "force fields," and "unfreezing, moving, and
refreezing" and their use by 'teachers' in the American classroom has been that influential in the 'changing' of our culture),
Maslow, Rogers, Bloom, Drucker, etc. (all, and more, have had their
input in the 'changing' of the world we live within), any way I digress,
as I was saying, an understanding of the dialectical process and its
effect upon you and the world you live in can not come from an academic
exercise in 'discovering' who you are before man, through philosophy
(including psychology, sociology, anthropology, etc.), it can only come
through a spiritual understanding of who you are before God, by His Word
and His Holy Spirit―something which
the 'contemporary' church has abdicated (and fights against), because of
its participation within the dialectical process, i.e. 'driven' by and
'purposed' in 'growing,' 'emerging,' etc. its sensuous, love
of this world, self (where the
feeling of "'righteousness' without righteousness"
pervades, i.e. man sensually and
'rationally' 'driven' with the 'purpose' of augmenting an environment
which engenders sensuousness over and against righteousness―choosing
the unrighteousness of mankind (being "positive," non-judgmental) over and against the righteousness
of God (being "negative," judgmental) in his effort to unit mankind in 'peace and justice,' sensuous
'beauty' and sensuous 'freedom'―the aesthetic dream
becoming 'reality' as dialectical thought is put into social action―praxis).
"It is Satan, the god of all dissension, who stirs up daily new
sects, and last of all, which of all others I should not have foreseen
or once suspected, he has raised up a sect such as teaches that man
should not be terrified by the law but be gently exalted by the grace of
Christ." Martin Luther Without the law, man can not know he is
a sinner. Without his knowledge that he is a sinner he can not
know of judgment. Without having a fear of judgment he would not
look for a redeemer. Without knowing the redeemer he can not know
God's mercy and grace. An academic understanding of the
dialectical process alone circumvents the issue of the wickedness of
man's heart by making the righteousness of God irrelevant, which
is the intent of the process in the first place.
As the children of Israel (on their way to the promised
land), remained (in their hearts) lovers of pleasure―worshipers of the
creation―and thus wanted to return to the pleasures of Egypt (or at
least have the pleasures of Egypt with them, while in the desert)
instead of being lovers of God―worshiping the creator―trusting in the
Lord (the manna of life) while walking through the wilderness,
Christians, who murmur against righteousness
(trying to 'circumvent' or negate, by the use of dialectical 'reasoning'
and action, God's restraints against and chastening for lusting after
the pleasures of this life, including the "approval of men") reject the restraints and chastening which
come with following the Lord (2
Corinthians 10:5), in their hearts.
Having never left the
sensuousness (the lusts of the flesh) of Egypt, they, as
the children of Israel who quickly fell victim to the sensuousness
of Canaan―whoring after their unrighteous ways, not only sin but
'rationally' 'justify' it by calling it 'normal human behavior.' When the
opportunity of sensuousness affords itself (their heart not being
right, i.e. righteous, in the Lord) they quickly join in. Thus negating
God's judgment upon sin, through their justification of human nature
through their use of polls, surveys, feasibility studies, i.e. depending
upon the sensuousness and 'reasoning' (opinions) of man,
they reject the mercy and grace of
God, not only in their lives but also in the lives of others who look up
to them for guidance.
Psychology, sociology,
anthropology, and philosophy (the "wisdom" of man) are all anathema to
the gospel for they (those who praxis them) can not make
themselves subject to the will of the Father (under the righteousness
of God) and
still remain in control over their lives and the lives of others (for the
'purpose' of augmenting the sensuousness of pleasure). Not being righteous in
and of himself, man is only able to pursue the augmentation of the
pleasures (and the attenuation of the pain and grief) of this world,
perceiving that (doing 'good' to others) is an act of 'righteousness' in
and of itself―doing
good is not bad, it is just that it is not righteousness
in and of itself―thus dialectically
redefining righteousness, that which restrains, chastens, and
condemns human nature, as being evil itself.
Man, in his sensuousness, 'rationally' perceives
the way of righteousness as being the initiator and
sustainer of physical, mental, and social pain and grief, as being the
cause of alienation, repression, and reification.
2 Corinthians 10:3-6
Thus, contemporary "ministers," trained in the profession of dialectical
thought and action, as scribes and Pharisees, love the seat of Moses,
i.e. love the accolades of men, but reject the spirit of Moses (who
chose to suffer with the children of Israel in the wilderness, living in
the righteousness of God, rather than live in the pleasures of
Egypt, living in the pleasures of this life, in sensuousness) and
use dialectical trickery to seduce, deceive, and manipulate
believers, i.e. the "called out ones," into thinking that they can
synchronize, "synergistically," the sensuousness of Egypt and the
righteousness of God and call it the church. Dialectically
deceived into believing that they are 'leading' the 'church' into the
promised land they are instead leading (taking pleasure in deceiving)
those who follow them into Babylon.
Only those who
trust in the Lord with all their heart, who do not lean to their own
understanding (dialectical thinking, 'reasoning' based upon
sensuousness over, and therefore against, righteousness), who acknowledge
Him in all their ways (letting the Lord direct
their thoughts and their actions), who are not wise in their own eyes,
i.e. who fear
the lord, love His Word rather than this world, including their very own
lives, and depart from evil (Proverbs 3:5-7),
only those who are redeemed by the Lamb of God, whose sins are covered
by His blood, his righteousness being imputed to them by
their faith in and belief upon Him, will not spend eternity in Hell, in
torment, in sorrow for their participation in the dialectic process, but
instead will spend it in Heaven (in the new earth, in the new
Jerusalem), in the Love, Joy and Peace of the Holy Spirit, Glorifying
God our Heavenly Father and His only begotten Son. "For it pleased the Father that in him
should all fulness dwell; And, having made peace through the
blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto
himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or
things in heaven. And you, that were sometime alienated and
enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he
reconciled; In the body of his flesh through death, to
present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his
sight:" Colossians 1:19-22
It is all about man's 'reasoning'
ability (man's ability to
evaluate what is 'good' and what is 'evil' for himself) being used to 'justify'
sensuousness over and against righteousness, 'justifying' that which is in and of man
(sensuousness―of nature)
over and against that which is not in and of man (refuting,
denouncing, and condemning righteousness, that which is not in or
of man, i.e. which is foreign or alien to human nature, being only of
God), which (man's 'dissatisfaction' with righteousness) can therefore be used to unite man with man.
When man and his fallen nature
(sensuousness) are 'rationally'
(dialectically) liberated from the restraints of righteousness,
human nature (sensuousness and human 'reasoning') becomes the
foundation of 'humanity.' That
which man has in common with all of mankind, "the lust of the flesh,
and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life," thus,
dialectically, becomes the "ground of being" for 'common-ism' and "world unity,"
i.e. "social justice" and "world peace," since it is
sensuousness (man's "lust" for the things of this world and his
'rational' ability to control, i.e. 'change' the world, the environment,
to initiate and sustain the augmentation of them) which all of society has
in common. When sensuousness is 'rationally' liberated from
the restraints of righteousness it is 'rationally' 'justified' in
the negating of righteousness. While God, through his Word, declares: "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) man, (worshiping the creation rather than the
creator), in his "wisdom," declares: “Eros is fundamentally a desire for union with
objects in the world. Eros is the foundation of morality.”
(Brown, Norman O, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of
History)
“... the aesthetic dimension and the corresponding feeling of
pleasure ... is the center of the mind ....
link the
‘lower’ faculties of sensuousness, (Sinnlichkeit) to morality ... –
the two poles of human existence"
(Herbart Marcuse,
Eros and Civilization: a philosophical inquiry into
Freud)
There is no in-between heaven and hell, no
escaping the Heavenly Father and his condemnation of sinful man (condemnation for his
fallen nature, condemnation for his lusting after his own sensuousness over and
against God's righteousness), except a temporary, illusionary
'escape,' initiated and sustained ('momentarily') in the imagination of
men's hearts. Other through faith in,
believing upon, and following after the only begotten Son of God, in
obeying His Heavenly Father's will, can man escape the condemnation of
hell. There is no "third" (or "forth") force or way, though
those
who are possessed with dialectical 'reasoning,' i.e. seducers,
deceivers, and manipulators, would like you to believe that
there is another way, another 'truth,' another life, another gospel.
For the sensuous man, an hour in heaven (living in
righteousness alone, glorifying God alone) would be (according to
his feelings, thoughts, and actions) an hour in hell. Even "Rock"
songs declare as much, although it won't happen, i.e. a carnal man being
in heaven that is.
Thus man finds himself, in his theory and his practice (in his thinking
and in his actions), 'living' and
thinking over and against righteousness (perfection)―that which
is not in, nor of man, which is only of God, who demands perfection (righteousness)
in man. "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in
heaven is perfect." (Matthew 5:48) Perfection
and righteousness is what man can not do in
and of himself, which therefore separates God, who is perfect,
righteous, and eternal, from man, who is imperfect, unrighteous, and
temporal, which thus divides men who are made righteous, i.e.
perfect in Christ, "Make you perfect in every good work to do his
will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight, through
Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen." (Hebrews
13:21), from men who remain in their sin, who willfully remain in their
unrighteousness, justifying their carnal thoughts and actions as being 'normal'
human behavior.
Others seek to 'justify' themselves before
themselves, others, and God by attempting to fulfill the law of God to
fulfill God's demand for perfection and righteousness. Yet all men, not redeemed
through Jesus Christ (not redeemed through His blood), not "perfect in every good work to do his
will," continue to love this world (sensuousness) and their
own unrighteous impulses, desires, and deeds (sensuousness) in it,
including those who live according to the law rather than living in
Christ―who fulfilled the law in
Himself―living in His
righteousness.
"Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in
his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. But now the
righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by
the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by
faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there
is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of
God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is
in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through
faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of
sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say,
at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier
of him which believeth in Jesus. Where is boasting then? It is
excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds
of the law." Romans 3: 20-29
"Love not the world,
neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the
love of the Father is not in him."
"And the world passeth away,
and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for
ever." I John 2:15, 17
It is here (in man's love of
this world and his own sensuous nature, which is stimulated by
the things of the world) that dialectical 'reasoning,' i.e. the
use of "Hegel's" 'A plus negative A equals A' formula comes into
'play' (comes into praxis or practice). In man's effort to 'justify' himself,
'justify' his carnal lustful desires, he redefines his sin
(his sensuous nature) as
simply being 'normal' human behavior (via. the use of "behavior
'science'"), i.e. comparing himself with himself ('justifying' his
sensuousness) rather than comparing himself with God (where
justification can only be found in God's righteousness, imputed
through faith in Jesus Christ, for it is impossible for man to be
righteous in and of himself for "all have sinned and come short
of the glory of God"), he therefore rejects justification, and therefore
salvation, which can only come by that righteousness which is not of his nature, that righteousness which is from above, from the will of the Father, from the obedience of His only
begotten Son, and from the power of the Holy Spirit.
"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
God's thoughts are upon (emanate
from) His
righteousness (Spirit, i.e. "light" with "no
shadow of turning"). Man's thoughts are upon (emanate
from) his
sensuousness (flesh, i.e. "darkness," which to man,
"seems to be 'light'";
"Take
heed therefore that the light which is in thee be not
darkness." Luke 11:35). God's ways are patriarchal
in paradigm, i.e. from above, unchanging, i.e. established, i.e. perfect, i.e.
righteous and spiritual (something which has not escaped the
attention of those who think dialectically). Man's ways are heresiarchal in paradigm, i.e. from
below, ever changing, i.e. imperfect, i.e. as "children of
disobedience" ever seeking after the
pleasures of this life, ever learning through the ways of
sensuousness therefore never able to comprehend the true meaning of
life―righteousness, "never able to come to the knowledge of the truth"
which can only come from He who is above man's sensuous nature.
Man's nature being unrighteous and sensual, i.e. not being righteous
in and of itself, makes man in and of himself, incapable of being
righteous, his sensuousness
always taking him
captive to the sensuous 'moment'―2 Timothy 3:1-8.
Apart from God and His righteousness all man has to lean upon is
his own understanding, i.e. his own sensuousness and 'reasoning.'
Therefore, being blind to the truth, man is, in and of himself,
incapable of knowing himself as he really is―wicked.
"But we are all
as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all
do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away."
Isaiah 64:6
"There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none
that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They
are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable;
there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an
open sepulcher; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison
of asps is under their lips: whose mouth is full of cursing and
bitterness: their feet are swift to shed blood: destruction and
misery are in their ways: and the way of peace have they not known:
there is no fear of God before their eyes. Now we know that
what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the
law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become
guilty before God." Romans 3:10-19
This article is about "Hegel's" 'A plus -A equals A'
formula which is the praxis of human 'reasoning' (man's
'rational' mind) being used to
'justify' the liberation of man's sensuousness from the
restraints (and judgment) of God's righteousness, i.e. man
perceiving (and deceiving) himself as being 'righteous,' in and of
himself, in his praxis of negating righteousness, i.e.
negating that righteousness which is not of his nature.
If you understand this article you understand the "new world
order" (which is as "new" as
Genesis 3:1-6,
which is the replacing of our Heavenly Father and His will with man and
his will, replacing God's way of thinking and acting, based upon His
righteousness, with man's way of thinking and acting, based upon his
sensuousness) and its affect upon you and the world you live
within.
"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. Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the
LORD, and depart from evil."
Proverbs 3:5-7
To obey (do) the will of His Heavenly Father is the reason
why
Jesus came. Our Heavenly Father and His love for us, is the
'justification' for Christ's virgin birth, death on the cross, and
resurrection from the grave―His
virgin birth and resurrection from the grave (by the will of the Father
and an act of the Holy Spirit) being incomprehensible to, as well as
condemning of, those who think and act dialectically. "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 "And we have seen and do testify that
the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world."
1 John 4:14 Dialectical thinkers, having rejected the father (who
sent his only begotten son so that man can come to know the father of
life) and thus rejecting the son (who obeyed the father in all things
and has called us to do the same), have rejected salvation, i.e.
salvation from the fathers wrath upon them. By 'chosen' their
sensuousness over and against His righteousness, they have
chosen eternal death instead of eternal live.
The negation of the Father (the father figure) is
the 'drive' and the 'purpose' of "Hegel's" 'A plus -A equals A'
formula, and thus the 'drive' and the 'purpose' of the "new" world
order. The Antichrist is "another" Christ, a dialectic Christ, one
not sent by the Father, one who places himself over and against the will
of the Father, speaking Agape but only able to produce Eros, promising
salvation but only able to sustain condemnation and guarantee damnation.
Chart:
The
taxonomizing of people (the student in the classroom, the worker
in the workplace, the legislature in the sub-committee, the citizen at
the town hall meeting, the minister at the ministers alliance, etc.) for
the sake of 'change' is required if the facilitator (as a 'scientist')
is to know what needs to be 'changed,' who needs to be
'changed,' and how 'change' is to be accomplished. When preaching and
teaching is used to justify an established
position, with chastening being used to reinforce the established
position and thus restrain the person from the praxis of
'change,' a thesis position or a patriarchal paradigm or a
traditional way of thinking and acting is maintained. But because
the nature of 'change,' the influences of "felt needs," impulses, or
"sensuous needs" of the flesh, stimulated by the sensuous
'moment' (the worldly environment stimulating the system of sensuousness) produces an antithesis condition it thus challenges
the categorical imperatives of the thesis position.
Dialoguing one's feelings and thoughts thus brings
into question the commands and rules of righteousness,
which restrain 'change.'
The 'purpose' of the dialectical way of thinking and acting (theory
and practice), is to 'change' the environment from being one which
initiates and sustains a thesis position (a formal-logical environment
created by preaching and teaching) to one which synthesizes a person's
"sensuous need" with his "sense
perceptions" (an informal-imaginative environment created by dialoguing to
consensus). Thus by creating an
environment which makes 'reasoning' subject to sensuousness
(subject to human "sense experience," subject to the
imagination of the heart) rather than subject to the righteousness
of God (subject to the Spirit of God, subject to His thesis position,
i.e. His every word) a person's dependence upon an established thesis
position is called into question, thus is perceived as being impractical
and is thus irrational, thus is irrelevant in the 'light' of the
'moment,' thus is negated, thus 'liberating' him (and the group)
from the patriarchal paradigm. Through the 'justification,' i.e.
emancipation of his sensuousness through 'reasoning' and putting
them (his feelings conjoined with his thoughts) into social action (praxis),
man is liberated (emotionally and mentally) from being under the control
of the patriarchal paradigm, thereby negating the patriarchal
paradigm (the system of Righteousness) as a way of
thinking and acting, not only for the individual but for society as
well. Justification for 'life' is thereby (dialectically) founded
and established (initiated and sustained) upon human sensuous social action (praxis) rather than upon
Righteousness
(rather than upon the patriarchal paradigm of the traditional home,
workplace, and government, all limited by Godly restraint).
The "new" world
order and the Antichrist have their foundation upon "Hegel's" diabolical
process which has become the way of thinking and acting for Americans
today. "Contemporary social
science, especially in America, bears the impact of Hegelian thinking to
an extraordinary degree. Cultural anthropology and social psychology,
especially of the psychoanalytic and Gestalt variety, and much of
present day sociology… are more Hegelian than they would like to admit,
or do acknowledge.”
(Friedrich)
Our government is
now being directed (seduced, deceived, and manipulated by
facilitators of 'change,' and thus is seducing, deceiving, and
manipulating the American public) through the praxis of
dialectical thought and dialectical action (theory and practice). If you understand this article you will also understand how you must respond if you do not
want to be (remain) a part of the "'new' world order"―"Education
Nation."
"Behold, the LORD'S hand is not shortened, that it cannot save;
neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: But your
iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins
have hid his face from you, that he will not hear." Isaiah 59:1,
2
"Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may
be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of
the Lord;" Acts 3:19
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his
only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not
perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the
world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be
saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that
believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in
the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the
condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved
darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For
every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the
light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth
cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they
are wrought in God." John 3:16-21
Introduction,
Part 1,
Part 2
© Institution for Authority Research,
Dean Gotcher 2010