"Casting down imaginations and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ." 2 Corinthians 10:3-5
Articles on Diaprax
(The dialectical process put
into praxis)
If you don't want to read the
following "Introduction to the articles," a comprehensive
overview of the dialectic process and its affect upon you and the world
around you:
go directly to the articles.
The following "Introduction" to the articles is an article in itself (some might say a book). I keep doing this, starting with a paragraph and ending up with pages (79 ± pages this time). My prayer is that you will never be the same after reading it, being more sure of your salvation, willing to endure to the end, for the believer, and more sure you need a savior, coming to know Christ as your savior, so that you can endure to the end, for the rest. Your study of the scriptures will certainly be more intense. 2 Timothy 2:14-16
Two brief presentation
I gave in Texas on October 16th, 2011 might be helpful in understanding
the following articles. The
first message
was to an assembly of believers in Dallas
(45 minutes), the
second
message was to an assembly of believers in Fort Worth the same morning (65 minutes),
James Borchert pastor.
The following is an outline (flow chart) of those
presentations to help you follow along. Righteousness ="Not"
(a parent's or God's command restraining sensuousness, correlated to
preaching and teaching "as given" truth) and
chastening used to enforce it (Hebrews
12:5-11) produces a system of Righteousness (a
patriarchal paradigm of categorical imperatives, i.e. established facts
and truth not to be questioned) - sensuousness (the foundation of the
matriarchal paradigm of "feelings" for unity, oneness with the world) =
produces "Why'" to get "Not" into dialogue (to negate preaching,
teaching, and chastening), but when "Because I said so," the threat of
force (pain) is used by the patriarchal paradigm (to inhibit or block
dialogue), an "ought" is produced in the one under authority
(sensuousness responding to the "Not" with an internal voice of
dissatisfaction, i.e. pent-up self-justification, hate towards
authority, and rebellion, i.e.
potential revolution) (Romans
7:14-25) - dialectic 'reasoning' (a heresiarchal paradigm of
'change') = 'justification' of sensuousness,
via. "thought," (dialogic 'reasoning'
liberating and justifying self-justification and rebellion, i.e.
revolution
The following is added here although not in the messages
above: "In
the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself in the other, they
experience
the
common ground of existence.
Therefore the dialectic of the
moral life must repeat itself."
Jürgen Habermas, Knowledge & Human Interest) produces a
common-collective 'rationally' justified "ought"
which negates
"Not," i.e. negates internally the system of Righteousness (Genesis
3:1-6), i.e. negates the fathers voice of restraint in the
individual (searing the conscience). Praxis is dialectically 'justified' sensuousness
(dialoguing opinions to consensus, i.e. the development of the super-ego) put into social action (revolution
is actualized as the person is self-actualized),
i.e. is man 'driven' by sensuousness, 'purposed' in 'rationally'
negating the system of Righteousness externally, i.e. negating
the fathers voice of restraint in society, i.e. negating the patriarchal
paradigm (the bourgeoisie, the fathers ruling)
through the praxis of the heresiarchal paradigm (the proletariat, the
children ruling, i.e. as patricide is praxised, incest is actualized,
and vise versa, i.e. as incest is praxised, patricide is actualized) = produces a nation and a world of abomination―Romans
1:16-32―which
we see around us today (remember that Sodom and Gomorra were all about
unity at all cost, i.e. unity based upon sensuousness, i.e. consensus.
Unity based upon sensuous, i.e. upon sight, i.e. upon "the imagination of the
heart," is anathema to righteousness, i.e. is anathema to faith, belief, obedience and
chastening, i.e. is anathema to "trusting in the Lord with all your heart and not
leaning to your own understanding.").
With
no fear of God and love of
His word, righteousness is supplanted with sensuousness. Dialectic
'reasoning' uses sensuousness to evaluate and judge righteousness,
making righteousness "irrational" and therefore "irrelevant" in the
sensuous 'moment,' i.e. as the unrighteous thoughts and unrighteous
actions of unrighteous men are put into praxis, i.e. social action (even
doing so in the "name of the Lord" or to "grow" the church).
Righteousness, evaluating and judging, i.e. restraining and chastening
sensuousness, is thereby negated. If there is any talk of
righteousness it is only in lip serve, i.e. used for social cause, i.e.
used to seduce, deceive, and manipulate the deceivable to set their
affections on things below, i.e. upon the world, i.e. upon those things
of the creation, i.e. the things in the heavens and upon the earth, instead of
upon He who is above the creation,
i.e. upon God alone―many being deceived into believing that righteousness and
sensuousness can be united through human 'reasoning' and put into social praxis
to make the world a "better" place,
i.e. man's sin before God and God's
"wrath upon the children of disobedience, i.e. the 'quivering daughters' of
disobedience" becoming moot in the praxis of the sensuous 'moment,'
i.e. man united in doing what "seems to be 'right'" in his own eyes,
known as consensus―putting his confidence in his 'good' heart and 'good'
deeds, Psalms 10:3, 4. The grace of God, when made subject
to dialectic 'reasoning,' sets man free from the fear of God (fear,
dread, awe, and wonder of God), so that he can be himself again, i.e.
sensuous, his carnal nature and 'reasoning' again justified in his own
eyes, deceiving not only himself but all who follow him in his deceitful
'reasoning,' falling away from the faith, not enduring to the end (2
Thessalonians 2:3, Matthew 24:5, Hebrews 6:4-6 & 10:26-31, 2 Peter,
2:20, 21, Luke 22:32―any effort to
circumvent these verses and others like them requires dialectic
'reasoning' to do so).
Only those who know of their wickedness before a pure, holy,
and righteous God and God's love and mercy towards them (in their
brokenness before and total dependence upon Him), does grace have true
meaning, and not just a sympathetic, emotional, i.e. sensual experience
for the 'moment' to impress self or man.
If God was not perfect, i.e. if He was not demanding of perfection, i.e.
if He was tolerant of imperfection or intolerant of imperfection, i.e.
if He was not righteous, man's wickedness, i.e. his disobedience, , i.e.
his sin, i.e. his love of sensuousness, i.e. his "lust" for the
"enjoyment" of this life would not be an issue. Only in worshiping God
and dying to self, i.e. hating the flesh and walking in the spirit, i.e.
setting your affection upon things above and not upon the things of the earth, does
the gospel having true meaning and affect in your life, the gospel being
God's grace and mercy towards you ("a child of disobedience," condemned,
with God's wrath waiting to cast you into hell), because of the Lord's
love towards you and your repentance before Him, not your ability to
'justify' yourself, i.e. your praxis, i.e. your thoughts and actions
before yourself and men, finding and
'justifying' what you have in common with man, your love of
sensuousness―which would be 'another'
gospel. Without the knowledge of God's wrath there is no
understanding of His love. "If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble
themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their
wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive
their sin, and will heal their land." 2 Chronicles 7:14
Two charts I used in the presentations. Diaprax Chart: You either preach & teach righteousness
(right from wrong, i.e. "Is" and "Is not")
and chasten sensuousness
("lust" i.e. disobedience) or you will end up with
dialogue ("ought")
'liberating' sensuousness to where
'reasoning' (self-justification, opinion, "seems to be")
can be used to engender consensus (a feeling of
oneness with the world of "lust"), i.e. mankind united in the praxis of negating righteousness,
i.e. man negating the "Though shalt" and "Though shalt not"
of God, i.e. man negating his duty, i.e. faith and
belief in and obedience to God (obedience being a
result, i.e. a byproduct of the Lord's work in us, i.e. dying to our
abilities and "talents," i.e. recognizing our inability to "carry out
orders," i.e. orders which we could never do, and still can not do, in
ourselves to the pleasing of God, and instead walking in the Spirit,
trusting in the Lord with all our heart).
Dopamine Chart: Environment
= "gratifying object" → Nerves system (5 senses) = Synaptic gap = dopamine emancipated = "want"
→ Brain = more
dopamine = more "want" = "lust of the flesh"
→ Mind = "aware,"
react to "want" = "want more"
→ Eyes = look for "gratifying object in
the environment to attain or retain it for more dopamine
emancipation" = "lust of the eyes"
→ Action to attain object of
gratification in the environment to control it to stimulate more
dopamine emancipation = "pride of life" is your able to control the
the object of gratification (or control the environment to control
the object of gratification) to augment dopamine emancipation.
You are not in love with the object of gratification, i.e. the
people you "love" to be around, but you are rather in love with the
dopamine the object of gratification, i.e. the people you
"love" to be around stimulate or "emancipate" within you = vanity, vanity, all is
vanity (love of money is simply stored up dopamine emancipation,
thinking about the money you have to emancipate dopamine with,
emancipates dopamine), i.e. all that is of man is sensuous love no matter
how social (or religious) it becomes, i.e. "What can I get out of the situation,
person, environment, group, 'approval of men,' etc. for me,"
i.e. lusting after the praises of men, thinking that is where love
resides.
A few (or more) side comments, not a part of the message: While God gave us the ability to enjoy the creation (dopamine emancipation)
he did not create us to love it (sensuousness) more than Him (righteousness).
True love is not of the flesh (from man himself) but is of the Holy Spirit (from God
only―John 15:9-12, i.e. God's love
is tied to his commandments, John 14:15, 21, 21, 15:9-15).
While man may have brotherly love―phileo,
besides carnal love―Eros (both of
which are of his sensuousness, i.e. of the flesh, i.e. of the
world), he can only
receive true love from God―agape―by His Holy Spirit. We are to
"agape the Lord or God" as well as "agape our neighbor
as ourselves" which we can not do in and of ourselves, our
love being vain. We are to deny ourselves
(deny our
sensuous desires, our carnal love), and pick up our cross (deny
our sensuous desire for "the approval of men" because we "approve
them," i.e. we want their "love" therefore we "love" them), and willingly face
rejection by the world (rejecting "the approval of men"
as being the standard for love). Because of the love of the Lord, our love for
Him (the fruit of the Holy Spirit), i.e. following Him above all that is in
the world, we can love others according to God's kind of love, who loves the world but
can not
love sin, i.e. love man's disobedience to his commands. "And he answering said, Thou shalt love [Gr. agape]
the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and
with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as
thyself." Luke 10:27 Loving "thy neighbour"
does not allow us to condone their sinful behavior any more than we are
to condone our own sinful behavior. While we are to trust no one
(except the Lord), we are to love everyone by His Spirit, as God loves everyone. God's love does not tolerate
our
unrighteousness, thus, while we are to love our fellow man, we are
likewise not to
tolerate our neighbor's
unrighteousness. We are not to be silent in the midst of
unrighteousness, in appearance condoning it, i.e. tolerating it for the sake of initiating
or sustaining human relationship, i.e. for the sake of initiating or
sustaining the "approval of men," but we must be willing to
expose it according to the Word of the Lord, and chasten it according to the Word of the Lord, speaking the truth
in His love (which is from God, in agreement with his righteousness
and not from man, proceeding from his sensuousness), as He directs our steps, i.e.
as He directs our thoughts and our
actions in all things―going to the person in private, then by two, etc.
not for the purpose of destroying him but to bring him to repentance,
i.e. to restore him to right relationship with the Lord (Matthew
18:15-17, James 5:19, 10, Galatians 6:1). This is
different than when a person is a heretic, then he is to be exposed and
reproved publically, as the Apostle John did concerning Diotrephes.
(3 John 1:9 and see also Titus 3:10)
The confusion comes when we "sense perceives" that
our love (of our sensuousness) is God's love (of His
righteousness), or
is equal
to God's love, referring to it as agape, deceiving ourselves, as well as
those who follow us in our praxis of seduction,
deception, and manipulation (calling brotherly love, i.e. our
feeling of "oneness," i.e. the sensation of "the
approval of men," God's love). We tolerate our own
unrighteousness (our own carnal nature), hiding it from the light―as those in the darkness love
the darkness because it hides their sins―condoning it because of
our
love for sensuous pleasures rather than God. God (who is patient with
us,
waiting for us to repent) is intolerant of our unrighteousness,
exposing it in the light of His Word―as light exposes whatever it is
that is hiding in the
darkness, condemning it and thus us because of our love for it (sensuousness-of
our flesh)
rather than loving Him (righteousness-of His Spirit).
While dopamine emancipation can be a
part of man's experience in loving in God's love (by His Spirit), it is
not necessary. God's love does not depend upon man's love (dopamine
emancipation). This is why temporal man can not comprehend it, "sense
perceiving" it as being a "phenomena," trying to classify it
according to his sensuousness, by his dialectic 'reasoning,'
thereby making it "social" in definition, i.e. according to his nature
(which is vain). This is why man is now
attempting to create a "new" world
order or "grow the church" through
the dialoguing of opinions (which can only comprehend that
which is of sensuousness). This is the method whereby man can "control" man by controlling the
environment which engenders dopamine emancipation (man's love of
being loved by others for his 'loving' of them).
The church has 'shifted' it paradigm from
inculcating the truth or preaching and teaching the Word of God ("as is") to souls,
with the Lord daily adding to the assembly of
believers such as
should be saved and the Lord directing the steps of those who are His, according to His
word, according to His will, by His Spirit, and is now dialoguing men's
opinions (to a consensus, i.e. a sensation of
oneness, i.e. of all in agreement to stay united at all cost, i.e.
"lets agree to disagree" for the sake of unity) as "the way" to come to the
knowledge of the "truth" ("Truth is a 'moment' in correct praxis."
Gramsci). According to dialectic 'reasoning,' "truth"
can only be found in the humanity (the earthiness or sensuousness
or "sense experience") of man and his social relationships
(commonality with other men) and can not originate from a source outside of, beyond, or above
human 'reasoning' or understanding, restraining it and/or condemning it.
For example (thanks to
pastor John Coleman for putting this up on his website,
johnecoleman.org)
this link to
Martin Luther King Jr.'s teaching of a humanistic Jesus shows the
effect of dialectic 'reasoning' (abomination) upon the mind and actions of men, not
only upon his mind and actions but also upon the mind and actions of those who
followed him (affecting not only the church but also the family). For more on Martin Luther King Jr. and his use of
dialectic 'reasoning' (to 'change' culture from a top-down, patriarchal
paradigm to an "equality" system, a heresiarchal paradigm
of 'change,' where the children of rebellion, the proletariat, take over
"control" of the individual and society, negating
the traditional family with its father figure at the head of the home) read my
article Civil
Disobedience and its side effects
(civil disobedience is an oxymoron, you can not be civil, i.e. respect
and honour the office of authority of the father and disobey it or him at the same time
without replacing the top-down system, the patriarchal paradigm, with a system of abomination,
the heresiarchal paradigm, as we
now see raising its head up, i.e. "emerging," in all cultures).
Gestalt is the belief that only when 'reason' (and thus sensuousness)
is freed from the restraint of the past (when the children or the next
generation is liberated from the can not's of the past
generation, i.e. the restraints "the authorities" place upon the
impulses and urges, i.e. the "lusts" or "enjoyments" of the 'moment' of
the present generation), can "truth," which lies within mankind (that
which is common to all mankind, i.e. the "divine spark" of humanity,
i.e. "God," i.e. the essence of man 'driving' him to become as one,
become at-one-with mankind, nature, and the cosmos, i.e. the world), become known and
actualized. "According to the philosopher
Hegel, truth is not found in the thesis, nor the antithesis, but in the emerging
synthesis which reconciles the two." (Martin Luther King Jr., Strength to Love)
As
I have always said: "It is not a race issue but a sin issue.
It has never been a race issue. It has always been a sin issue
that we are dealing with."
Dialectic 'reasoning' adheres to the belief that sin is the estrangement of
man from man, i.e. the result of laws or commands given by a higher authority
than man's sensuous nature, estranging individual man from
finding unity through his common human nature with all of mankind.
Dialectic 'reasoning' rejects the belief that sin is the estrangement of man from
God, i.e. laws or commands given by a higher authority than man,
estranging man from He who is above and not of human nature, not of the
sensuous impulses and urges of the man's or the child's nature of
the 'moment' (with the good news of the gospel of having
overcome man's nature and the eternal damnation which comes with it
because of His death on the cross and his resurrection from the grave that man might be
freed from the control of his nature, freed from his "lusting for
the control of 'pleasure'" or rather freed from the "lust for
pleasure" controlling him and therefore freed from eternal damnation,
i.e. instead being freed from his sin, i.e. freed from the power of his
nature, by his faith in Christ and by the power of the Holy Spirit, into
eternal life). You can 'change' the culture but
without the heart of man being changed by the Lord (bringing man to a
right relation with His Heavenly Father), all you end up with is a pagan
culture of hate, greed, vanity, murder, and abomination, no matter how
"social" it might become. Sodom was social unite
in praxis at its highest level, with social unity (based upon "human relationship") as
its cause and its affect, i.e. its "drive" and its "purpose"
was
"unity at all cost," with sensuousness at its core. Dialectic 'reasoning ("human
relationship, based upon 'enjoyment/pleasure,' at all cost," the
"tolerance of sin and unrighteousness") has become
the means and the end to all "truth" for the "contemporary" church and
the "contemporary" Christian. It is why we, in
practically all facets of life from the highest offices of our land to
the streets (including, and especially the "church's") have become a
nation and a people of abomination, promoting abomination ("tolerance of
ambiguity") around the
world. Every "hallowed wall," including the Christian, (Obama
in his speech in Berlin) must be torn down so that all can join in
the process of creating world peace and social harmony, or the process,
i.e. world unity based upon human nature (based upon unrighteousness),
can not become a reality.
"... let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so
easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set
before us, Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who
for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the
shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God." Hebrews
12:1, 2 Jesus obeyed His Heavenly
Father and is now seated at the right hand of His Heavenly Father
awaiting His order to return again for those who are His, i.e. all those
who are obedient to His Heavenly Father. All made possible through
His birth, i.e. taking on the form of a man, living obedient to His
Heavenly Father's will, even to death (facing the rejection of men, i.e.
not basing right and wrong on "the approval of men"), i.e. while living
in the world he did not live according to the world (according to
sensuousness), and His resurrection from the grave and returning to
His Heavenly Father, that the Holy Spirit could be sent to comfort and
direct us in obedience to His Father's will as well―living by faith and
not by sight, walking by His Holy Spirit and not according to our flesh,
living in His righteousness, which is holy and pure, which is
life, and not in our 'righteousness,' which is as a filthy rag, which
leads to death.
In the true church (the body of Christ) man has no "control" (nor desires
to have "control")
over others (coming between them and the Lord, whereby he can seduce, deceive, and
manipulate them for his own sensuous "pleasures,"
i.e. using the bride of Christ, as a prostitute, for his own gain),
while in the apostate church man "controls" man through the use of the
environment (which includes himself) which engenders sensuous "pleasure,"
i.e. dopamine emancipation. This is why the
"contemporary" church (which means "with the temporary,"
i.e. through sensuousness, i.e. an attribute engendered from
feelings or "experiential sensation") has contempt
for the Word of God, i.e. making it subject to men's opinions.
The
worth or value of scripture is determined according
to how a person "feels" about what it says or what he "thinks"
it means according to his or others "sense experience" in the
'moment,' i.e. according to men's opinions, i.e.
according to what pleasure or hope of pleasure he can
derive from it or use it for. Only that which he and others can
sensually identify with (experientially in the 'moment' identify with
in the group setting) is
of worth or value. Only those scriptures which are understandable
or can be redefined to become understandable to all men, both lost and
saved, in the current environment (in the 'moment'), is of worth or value, i.e. is "trustworthy."
"In this process the individual becomes more open to his experience.
It is the opposite of defensiveness or rigidity. His beliefs are
not rigid, he can tolerate ambiguity." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person)
". . . he must experience the group as a
refuge wherein he is safe, wherein he can entertain new beliefs
and experiment with new behavior without fear of reprisal."
(Irvin Yalom, The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy) "Existential living is to say that
the self and personality emerge from experience. It means that
one becomes a participant in and an observer of the ongoing process
of organismic experience." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person)
"To identify with more and more of the world,
moving toward the ultimate of mysticism, a fusion with the world, or
peak experience, cosmic consciousness, etc." (Abraham
Maslow, Maslow on Management) “The person at the peak experience is godlike . .
. complete, loving, uncondemning, compassionate and accept[ing]
of the world and of the person.” (Abraham Maslow, Toward a
Psychology of Being)
"Then
both parties recognize their rigidified position in relation to each
other as the result of detachment and abstraction from their common life
context. And in the latter, the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself
in the other, they experience the common ground of their existence."
(Jürgen Habermas, The Idea of the Theory of Knowledge as Social Theory)
The
"contemporary" church, is 'driven'
by and 'purposed' in initiating and sustaining an
"experiential" environment which
engenders man's love of dopamine emancipation, even doing so "in
the name of the
Lord," thereby deceiving many, i.e. making merchandise of them,
i.e. buying and
selling their souls in the marketplace of "pleasure," i.e.
'driven' by and 'purposed' in dopamine
emancipation. In this way they keep coming back for more,
dopamine emancipation that is.
Preface
The following comments are a follow up of the messages above
and a preface to the Introduction to the Articles,
below, and may be somewhat hard to follow at first. It got lengthy
as well (±
26 pgs.) but is full of important information, that is, it will make the
dialectic process and its affect upon you more understandable. I
wish I had known this information prior to my college years, although I
might not have deemed it important enough to read back then, not knowing
where my "education" was taking me. For
those who persevere through to the end, enduring my repetition, it will
make it clear how we are being deceived by the great deceiver.
I find myself at a
disadvantage at times, having read the works of Godless men (hundreds of
their books, reading some books many times over to clearly understand
their method of thinking and acting), men who knew the
scriptures better than most men of God, and who cunningly (deceitfully)
devised methods, which they found in the scriptures, for the promotion
of evil rather than good, hiding their agenda (to 'justify' man's
wickedness) in methods which have been brought into the "church"
(through enlightened church leadership who thought that these
methods would be "helpful" in "growing" their ministry, i.e.
in "growing" their church). The disadvantage being
that when I read the scriptures in meetings, most Christians, thinking it is just another
bible class, tend to tune-out, not yet realizing the significance of the
scriptures I am using, i.e. how the enemy is using them for his
own 'purpose' (or gain) and their significance in exposing and overcoming
the methods of the enemy, methods not yet exposed and understood (in the light of
God's word) by the audience. Most misunderstanding and attack
comes from those (along with their followers) who use the scriptures (much of which are not the
scriptures but rather the opinions of men) for their own gain, defending the methods of their
choosing, i.e. the methods of seduction, deception, and
manipulation to initiate and sustain the "kingdom of God" of their
own making (even using the name of the Lord in doing so―the
kingdom of God is "doing the Father's will," i.e. by His Word and His
Spirit, and is not built upon the 'reasoning' ability and strength of
man, i.e. according man's will, i.e. 'driven' by his "spirit,"
i.e. sensuousness, united in his 'purpose,' i.e. spontaneity). Through
the use of "original source," for example, "academic" environments
(those bound to the use of "the 'scientific' method," i.e. the dialectic
process) refuse to respect this kind of information, i.e. information which bases truth or
reliability/certainty upon the authority of God's Word (that which is above
man's wisdom and strength, that which is according to God's will, by His
Spirit) over and
against human
'reasoning,' enlightened 'reasoning,' i.e. sensuous
'reasoning,' since any exposé must be based upon the writings and ideas of
men (of his own "sense experience," of his own nature―which
is presumed to being 'good') rather than of (and thus supporting
of) a "non-intellectual," "non-human," "non-sensuous" source such as the
Word of God and the Holy Spirit―who are
good, i.e. only God is good. "Sense experience must be the basis of all
science." (Karl Marx) "... a science
based on an erotic sense
of reality." (Norman O. Brown
Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of
History)
To be "balanced" (that is, not to judge man as
being deceitful and wicked, i.e. as being sinful in his nature) man's
'reasoning,' i.e. dialectic 'reasoning,'
i.e. "profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely
so called," "vain words," and "philosophy and vain deceit" (1
Timothy 6:20,21; Ephesians 5:5-7; Colossians 2:8), also know as "critical
theory," must
always be included and recognized as being "superior to" or "equal
with" the Word of
God (to be "equal with" the Word of God is to be "superior to" the Word of God) or have more weight of
credibility (with any subject of value) to the "intellectual" (enlightened)
mind.
Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason 'justifies' dialectic
'reasoning' on that bases, i.e. that man's 'reasoning' can be pure, i.e.
good in and of itself. Therefore man can come to know the
truth about himself ('justify' himself) and the world according to his
own human 'reasoning,' i.e. according to his own speculation.
The truth is (regarding the following information), by reading through what is written,
i.e. to know what is
being said (weighing all according to the Word of God) any
misunderstanding should be overcome, that is, if you are a person of
faith in the Lord and not a person of dialectic 'reasoning.' In that
case (if you are a person of dialectic 'reasoning'), there is nothing
that can be written about the righteousness of Christ and the
wickedness of man that you will not distort in some way, for your
own 'self-justification,' or attack outright to initiate and sustain
your own sensuous world, i.e. to "serve and protect" your carnal
identity. You would think I was speaking only of the secular world
but I am also speaking of "contemporary" minded ministers and
their
"contemporary" churches.
The relevance of knowing this material is that the dialectic
process directly affects every part of our daily life. It is our
very "human" nature being 'justified' by "human" 'reasoning.' I use the word
"human," which is not found in the
word of God, although heresy manuscripts are now using it, for carnal
man, man void of spiritual understanding, full of pride in his
'reasoning' abilities, justifying himself before himself and his
"fellow" man, determining what is right or wrong, good or evil,
according to his own worldly nature (according to his own ability of
'reasoning,' i.e. 'reasoning' in the same structure as eastern religion,
i.e. 'reasoning' through the "light" of his own sensation). "Human nature" is the 'drive' and the
'purpose' for the use of the dialectic process which is used for the
justification of man as being right (righteous or justified) in his own
eyes, i.e. right according to his own carnal nature and therefore
'right' according to his own carnal understanding. The woman in
the garden in Eden used "human 'reasoning," i.e. dialectic 'reasoning'
to justify her original desire to "touch" the "forbidden tree," i.e.
justifying the "lust" of her flesh, the "lust" of her eyes, and her
"pride of life," i.e. her ability to direct her own steps, i.e.
"control" her own life, thus disobeying God's will. While in the
wilderness, the Lord made reasoning, i.e. the reason for his actions,
subject to His Fathers will, i.e. 1) man's "duty" is to "live by
every word which proceeds from God," and not just live
according to the "needs" of his flesh, i.e. man is not to live according
to the "lust of his flesh," 2) man's "duty" is to "worship the Lord,
God," and "only worship Him" and not worship the things of
his own perception, i.e. not worship according to the "lust of his
eyes," and 3) man's "duty" is not to "tempt God," i.e. not to
make God subject to his sensuous desires, i.e. not make God and
His word subject to his "control," i.e. his "pride of life").
While Jesus
preached
and
taught, "It is
written," i.e. he responded to his situation according to faith,
i.e. according to righteousness,
the woman
dialogued, i.e. she
responded to her situation according to her own 'reasoning' ability,
i.e. 'reasoning' according to her own "sense perception," i.e.
she responding to her situation according to sight, i.e. according to sensuousness. The
confusion comes when people think that God dialogues with man. To
dialogue is to make all participants equal. The truth is
God discusses with man. In other words he never places
himself as being equal with man, but as a father discussing the
son's behavior or desires, he maintains his position of authority.
For example (using
education as an example): when the classroom was 'changed' from the teacher inculcating
facts and truth and the students memorizing them "as given,"
with the
students then being tested on their
retention of them, being rewarded when they "passed the test" and
chastened when they did not "pass the test," to where the teacher and students, in
partnership, shared their opinions (their personal feelings and thoughts) on
"contemporary" issues (current situations), the study of "human nature" (behavior
"science," i.e. "so called science" 1 Timothy 6:20), i.e. humanism,
replaced the teaching of truth and facts (true science), i.e.
negating the laws
of nature (regarding the physical world as established by God) and the laws of God
(regarding
the soul of man) from the classroom experience and therefore from the
present and future generations. The 'change' was due to the dialectic process
having become
the "new" teaching method in education, i.e. curriculum development
was 'changed' through the use of
"Bloom's Taxonomies."
The same has been true for the workplace (Total Quality Management),
the police force (Community Oriented Policing System), government
(School-to-Work, now called "Education Nation"), the military (Total Quality Leadership), the
"contemporary" (post-modern) church ("Church Growth," "Emerging
Church," and whatever new name comes along), etc. By making
"higher order thinking skills," key to the field of science (subject to
the material world), the same tool for 'discovering' "morals and
ethics," righteousness (obeying parents, teacher, the boss, the
laws, and highest of all, God, by
faith―tantamount to "lower order thinking skills") was replaced
with sensuousness (judging right and wrong behavior according to
how it makes people "feel" in a given situation) as the issue of life,
i.e. not only in the classroom, but also in the workplace, government,
the home, and even the church.
While knowing this information will not save a person
from the abuse which comes by the means of dialectic 'reasoning,' it
will help you understand what is happening to you and the world around
you and how you are to respond to it if you are not to become subject to
its "control." Without the righteousness of
Christ, faith in and belief upon Him and the power of the Holy Spirit,
it is impossible for us to overcome the "controlling" nature of our
sensuousness, our "lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes," and our
"pride of life," i.e. our thinking and acting as though we can
"control" our lives and the world around us for the "betterment" of
life. "Ye
adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the
world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the
world is the enemy of God. Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain, The spirit that
dwelleth in us lusteth to envy? But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith,
God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble. Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he
will flee from you. Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your
hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded. Be afflicted, and
mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to
heaviness. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up."
a portion of James 4:1-17 "Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the
elder. Yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed
with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the
humble." 1 Peter 5:5
Without the submitting and humbling ourselves before God first (realizing
and repenting of our wickedness and
accepting and resigning ourselves to His righteousness first),
the resisting and the fleeing of the Devil (righteousness
prevailing and ruling over sensuousness in our life) will not (can not) happen. None of
which seems to be of relevance today (is not considered nor acted upon)
in a world of "enjoyment" and pleasure (as in the days of Noah), in a
"rapidly 'changing,'" multi-screen world of sensuousness and
dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. a world of self-social 'justification,' i.e.
a world of men, dialoguing their opinions into a
common-collective consensus (into a "feeling" of "oneness"), and
putting their common-collective opinion (mankind is good, i.e.
'righteous' in and of himself when he works together for the common
'good') into social action (praxis), all based upon (tolerant of)
man's carnal sensuous nature (of unrighteousness).
There is no "lifting" or "exalting" by God without the
"submitting" and "humbling" of man before Him first, something the
world hates and refuses to do in its praxis of "loving" and
"caring" for the "common" man (all done in vanity, and therefore in
vain). The enlightened religious leaders of
Jesus day chose Caesar over Christ because they were not walking in the
spirit of God, i.e. did not have spiritual eyes, because they were
walking in the flesh, i.e. having "roaming" eyes (dialectic,
self-'justifying' of the flesh eyes).
They had "listening" skills but were unteachable (regarding the truth),
i.e. "listening" to Jesus to find a flaw in what He said or did so that
they could justify themselves before themselves and other men.
Therefore they were unteachable regarding their sensuousness
(unteachable regarding their unrighteousness, i.e. regarding their love
of this world and their hate of His Father) and His righteousness
(His love of His Father). Man's intellectual assent to God always
intercepts righteousness (God' will) and puts sensuousness
(man's will) in its place. That is why, without faith, it is
impossible to please God. "But without faith it is impossible to please him:
for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a
rewarder of them that diligently seek him." Hebrews 11:6
"For therein is the righteousness of God revealed
from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by
faith." Romans 1:17
"That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of
men, but in the power of God." 1 Corinthians 2:5
"For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world:
and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith."
1 John 5:4 "And be found in him, not having mine own
righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the
faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:"
Philippians 3:9
Dialectic 'reasoning' (Socratic critical thinking,
critical theory, "higher order thinking skills in 'morals and
ethics,'" i.e. the "scientific method" used to determine right from
wrong regarding mans thoughts and actions, i.e. human behavior, situational ethics, values clarification, etc,
is "the pride of
life," i.e. thinking that we, by "controlling" the environment around
us (replacing God's laws―which man
could not fulfill, which only condemned us, exposing us as wicked,
having to be fulfilled in Christ―with
man's laws, i.e. laws protecting the environment), can make the world a "better" place not only for ourselves
but also for others―the truth being all of our thinking and action, no matter how well
disguised, is from and for our own vanity and pride, i.e. for our "lust" for the
"enjoyment" of our flesh and our eyes) is used to
evaluate the source for and resolve the conflict between belief and
behavior, what God says and man feels and thinks, i.e. what the parent
says and what the child feels and things (known as belief-action dichotomy,
i.e. a condition of antithesis between the system of
Righteousness, i.e. obeying commands as given, and the system
of sensuousness, doing what one "feels" like doing, which the Apostle Paul
explains in Romans 7, giving the answer in Jesus Christ,
in His obedience to His Heavenly Father will, and therefore in His righteousness imputed by Him to men of faith in Him
alone). The condition of "neurosis," as described by Paul,
is not resolved in man, in sensuousness negating righteousness
(by dialectic 'reasoning'), but in Christ, in righteousness
restraining sensuousness (by faith in Christ). Dialectic
'reasoning' is used, by men of seduction, deception, and
manipulation, to resolve the conflict between that which is of the
spirit (identifying that which is above or is greater than the
flesh, i.e. thus is used by dialectic 'reasoning' to identify and negate that which restrains,
inhibits, blocks, or condemns man's flesh nature, to identify and
negate that which judges man's carnal impulses of the 'moment,' his
sensuous-spontaneous response to the immediate environment as
being sinful, to identify and negate
that which is negative toward and restraining of the
human "sense experience" of the carnal oneness he
experiences with the world, i.e. of
his at-one-with-man in the sensuous 'moment') and that which is of
the flesh (that which is of man's common sensuous desires, i.e.
that which is positive toward and encouraging of
the human "sense experience" of the oneness with the
world,
his carnal at-one-with-man 'moment').
Dialectic 'reasoning' is used to identify and resolve the conflict between that which
restrains or blocks man's common carnal sensuous desires (negating
the conflict between belief (from above) and behavior (from below) through the praxis of
"negation of negation," i.e. negating that which is absolute, i.e.
negating that which is not influenced by the
"contemporary" situation, i.e. negating that which is
negative, i.e. judgmental toward man's common carnal sensuous behavior) and that which
initiates and sustains man's common carnal sensuous desired (augmenting
that which is adaptable, i.e.
that which is 'relevant' to and encouraging of the "contemporary"
"experiential" situation). Dialectic 'reasoning' is used to
resolve the conflict between that which
refuses to change and that which desires 'change,' between
righteousness and sensuousness, etc., attempting
to "rationally," i.e. through the dialoguing of opinions,
(through "I feel" and "I think") find "common ground" between the two conflicting positions (between
the two patriarchal paradigms which are in conflict),
thereby 'rationally' (sensually) negating belief, spirit,
absolute, unchangingness, righteousness, etc. thereby negating
the patriarchal paradigm or the top-down way of thinking and acting. To expose dialectic 'reasoning' as
being the enemy of righteousness, in a room (world) full of
dialectic 'thinkers' is to cast oneself into the
lions den, the lions of enlightened Christians, skilled in
the art-craft of dialectic 'reasoning,' skilled in trickery, skilled in
negating truth by making their lies appear as being the truth and
thus the truth of God and His Word as appearing to be a lie (not
relevant in all or certain situations), i.e. making righteousness
not only "sense perceived" as being 'irrational' but
"sense experienced" as being 'irrelevant' in the "light" of man's
"felt" needs in the 'moment,' i.e. in the so called, "rapidly changing times." "Jesus
said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I
proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent
me. Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my
word. Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye
will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the
truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he
speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. And because
I tell you the truth, ye believe me not." John 8:38-59
"Lie not
one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his
deeds [Gr. praxis]; and have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge
after the image of him that created him." 1 Corinthians 2:16
From the creation to judgment, and the reward or punishment
that follows, the sum total of life is wrapped up around the will of the
Father (God, who is righteous in and of Himself). We either obey Him and live (are blessed) or disobey Him
and die (are cursed), life being only found in Him (man, formed from the dust of the ground,
by the breath of God, i.e. the breath of life,
became a living soul, to the tree of life in the garden in Eden, to the
only begotten Son of God, who is life, to the resurrection/rapture of
the redeemed in Christ, to
eternal life). The history of death, as revealed through the
scriptures, is about he (Satan, the master facilitator) who came between
the children (man) and the father (God), i.e. not that man is God or a
son of God (righteous
in and of himself, i.e. righteous in his own eyes), and convinced the children that they could be as
gods (be equal with the father, i.e. that their will was equal to his
will in the 'moment,' that they were righteous in and of themselves,
i.e. righteous in their own eyes).
The preaching and teaching of righteousness, i.e.
faith, belief, obedience, and chastening (intolerance of
ambiguity, i.e. intolerant of man's unrighteous thoughts and actions), used to initiate and sustain obedience (to
initiate and sustain the
patriarchal paradigm of obedient children), is always undermined through
the praxis of dialoguing the opinions of
sensuousness, i.e. doubting, questioning, disobedience, and
permissiveness (tolerance of ambiguity, i.e. tolerant of man's
unrighteous thoughts and actions), used to initiate and
sustain disobedience (the heresiarchal paradigm of disobedient,
rebellious,
revolutionary children,
i.e. children of 'transformation,'
i.e. children of 'change'―links are audio
clips of Shirley McCune speaking at a Governors conference hosted by
Bill Clinton in 1989, regarding education 'change').
By coming between the
father and his children (taking that position which is not theirs to
take, i.e. "helping" the children to determine right from wrong
according to their own carnal nature, i.e. thereby 'liberating' the
children from the fathers authority), humanism
(social-psychology) is born, born of the nature of carnal man (of the sensuous and spontaneous nature
of the "polymorphously perverse" child), liberating them from the restraints of God (the father),
"liberating" them from the restraints of righteousness (right and
wrong being determined according to the fathers will). Man is
(children are) thus convinced that he (they) can know good from evil
according to his (their) own sensuousness, in defiance to knowing
good and evil according to their Heavenly Father's will (their earthly
father's will), thus turning him (them), in defiance (in
self-justification), against his creator (their creator), who is
righteous (who is in authority over them). Without the
chastening (judgment) or the fear of chastening (the fear of judgment)
the carnal nature of the child rules over the affairs of men,
controlling the world for his own desires, i.e. for his own pleasures,
i.e. for his own "lusts," i.e. for his own dopamine
emancipation.
As you will see, the object, i.e. the person or
the event only has worth as it engenders and satisfies desires,
pleasures, "lusts," dopamine emancipation, i.e. the object, in
and of
itself, has no other 'purpose' or value. In that case, He who
is righteous (who is righteous in Christ), who places
himself above the sensuous 'moment,' can not be considered of
worth, in and of Himself, without fulfilling the conditions of dialectic
'reasoning,' the satisfaction of man's sensuous desires. Righteousness,
God's will and His chastening for disobedience against it, is "ugly" in
the eyes of "the children of disobedience."
"Why did they kill the ugliest man?"
According to Nietzsche, "Because they
could not stand him." (Leonard F. Wheat,
Paul Tillich’s Dialectical Humanism: Unmasking the God above God)
"Having eyes which are human eyes, and ears which are human ears,"
(Karl Marx)
"there is no fear of God
before their eyes" (Romans
3:18). It
is here that the Father's will, i.e. the righteousness of God,
becomes an object in which dialectic 'reasoning' must "overcome" and
negate (remove from its sight) if it is to "control" the affairs, i.e. the thoughts and
actions, of men (so that man can free himself of having a "guilty"
conscience―the "guilty" conscience in the child, due to the child's
disobedience to the parent's command, i.e. a command preached and
taught to be obeyed "as given or else," is now a "super-ego," a
"feeling" of "shame" in the parent, due to the parent preventing his
child from "freely" sharing his own opinion, i.e. his feelings
and thoughts in opposition to or different from, i.e. antithetical to
the parent's "command," i.e. now an "opinion"―without the
chastening or threat of chastening every command is simply an
opinion). According to dialectic 'reasoning,' instead of
man's thoughts being taken captive to the "obedience of Christ,"
i.e. His unwavering obedience to His
Heavenly Father, they must be taken captive to the sensuous desires of
men, i.e. taken captive to the sensuous desires (impulses and
caprice) of the child, i.e. the heart of the "children of
disobedience," for which the wrath of God is reserved. Without the
Lord's work in us, cleansing our heart of its wicked, earthly desires,
all we have is "the heart of the child within." "Create in me a
clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me."
Psalms
51:10 (read vs. 7-13) "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is
a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are
become new." 2 Corinthians 5:17 As Christ declared
of Himself, the same is true for us. "Then answered
Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do
nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things
soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. He that speaketh of
himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh his glory that sent
him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him. John 5: 19; 7:18
The question then asked of all men, is: do you have a
problem obeying God or a problem with obeying God? One paradigm
recognizes the sinful nature of man and his need for repentance and
forgiveness (recognizing the authority of the Father and man's, i.e. the
child's propensity toward disobedience, i.e. being drawn away by the
"enjoyments" of the world, the sensuous impulses of the 'moment,'
i.e. recognizing the authority of the father to chasten his child when
his child is disobedient to his commands), the other seeks
to 'justify' man's (the child's) carnal nature as being "normal" (allowing
him to question and challenge the commands and the authority of the Father).
I am not stating that the earthly father is 'good' or righteous in and of
himself. He is not. Our earthly fathers are not perfect,
but the office is. He is to rule in it as the Lord directs his
steps, which most fathers refuse to do, loving their own carnal,
"lustful," sensuous nature first and foremost and therefore using
the office as a tyrant or abdicating it to the wife, to someone else, or
to society, as they pursue the things of the world, satisfying
their own carnal nature, i.e. for their own pleasures. Man having a problem with
obeying God is the way of
dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. of the "new" world order―which
is patterned after Genesis 3:1-6, which leads to death and not life.
As fallen man, reasoning from his own sensuous, sinful nature,
after the laws of the flesh, deceives himself, 'reasoning'
dialectically, believing that by' 'liberating' himself from the
restraints of righteousness, he can 'discover' and 'actualize'
(create from within himself) a "new" life, a "new" world, a "new" order
of the world patterned after his nature, 'liberating' himself from the
guilty feelings of his unrighteousness, 'liberating' himself from the
pattern of the "old" world where man is accountable for his every
thought and action to a higher authority than his own nature.
Without God creating within us a "clean heart," "renewing a right
spirit within" us, making us a "new creature," in His righteousness,
all we have is the way of the world, not only having a problem obeying
God but also a problem with obeying Him, and thereby dying in our
sins. "And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from
above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world. I said
therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe
not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins." John 8:23, 24
If you put your trust in man, your trust in this life, if you
put your trust in man's ability to create a "new" world 'driven' by and
'purposed' in dopamine emancipation, a "new" world with all men
seeking after the "enjoyments" of this life, pleasure (for themselves
and others) being the highest goal in life "ye shall die in your
sins." "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he
that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God
abideth on him." John 3:36 " He that believeth and is
baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."
Mark 16:15 "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there
is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be
saved." Acts 4:12 "For if we sin wilfully after that
we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more
sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and
fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. He that despised
Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: Of how much
sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath
trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the
covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done
despite unto the Spirit of grace?" Hebrews 10:26-29 By
the fruit of a man's thoughts and actions you can tell his heart,
whether it remains deceitful and wicked (and full of hate), still 'driven' by and
'purposed' in his own sensuousness, the "fruit" being of the
sensuousness of the world, or created new in the righteousness
of the Lord (loving as He loves, i.e. reproving, correcting,
encouraging, forgiving in word and in deed), the "fruit" being of the righteousness of
Christ, the way, truth, and life of Christ in him. "Now the
parable is this: The seed is the word of God. Those by the way
side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word
out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved. They
on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy;
and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of
temptation fall away. And that which fell among thorns are they,
which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and
riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection.
But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart,
having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience."
Luke 8:11-15
Just because someone makes you feel good or you like them
(they engender dopamine emancipation in you) is not a criteria
for righteousness. Only if they love you enough to risk
your rejection of them, rejection because they chastened you through
God's Word (pointing you to the Lord and His Word for answers and not to
yourself or man, i.e. including themselves), i.e. chastening you when you are in sin
or warning you when
you are moving in the direction of sin, while encouraging you to
continue in Christ (all of what the Apostle John, in
1 John, writes
about). Only then do you know of
their love for you and their love which is of righteousness, and only
then, by receiving the chastening from the Lord, from His word (and not
really from them) do you know of His righteousness and His love
for you. All you
are getting from them is their love for you (love hurts, or "wounds," the one being
loved, when they are being chastened, as well as the one who loves, when
they have to face the fact they may be rejected for sharing the truth in
love―the glory of God outweighs "the approval of men"). Righteousness has to supersede the desire for
dopamine emancipation, restraining the sensuous desires of
man's heart when it is wrong or desires the "approval of men" in its
"lustful" nature, or it is not righteousness.
Righteousness points you to God above (by His Word and His Spirit)
while sensuousness points you to the world below (of man's flesh
and his "wisdom").
Getting dopamine emancipation (pleasure or
"enjoyment") from buying, wrapping,
and watching your child open a gift you bought them is no different in
sensation than buying, wrapping, and watching some one else's child open
a gift you bought them except for the fact you can not chasten
another person's children (unless given the authority to do so by them). In the latter action
(under the
conditions of socialism) chastening ("Thou shalt not" backed up with
force, a key component of righteousness, i.e. "This child is
my child and not
your child") is negated.
Without the God given right to chasten your children, for their
disobedience of your commands, they are not your children but become the
children of the "universe." Righteousness requires the
chastening of sensuousness. Without the chastening
(restraining) of sensuousness there is no condition of
righteousness.
Only God's love, spiritual, of righteousness, is true love,
ever-lasting love. Man's love, temporal, of sensuousness,
of the flesh, is vain love, is ever-'changing' love, is
conditional (according to what he can get out of the situation for
himself in the
'moment') love. God
chastens those He loves, i.e. restrains the sensuousness and 'reasoning'
ability, i.e. cutting off the 'self-justification' ("the lust
of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of
life") of those who are His, to get them off the drug of dopamine,
i.e. off the love of the world, his chastening producing a "peaceful fruit of
righteousness." God fills man's
heart, not with the love of this world, not of man's carnal nature (dopamine
emancipation―of sensuousness), but with His love, of His
nature (spiritual―of righteousness). The peace that
comes from chastening is sensuousness silenced (the soul freed
from the influence and control of the flesh―which no man or religion of
the world can fulfill to man's salvation, i.e. the religions of the
world meaning not believing upon the "only begotten son of God,"
and not loving God the Father, i.e. "him that begat" the Son―"In this was manifested the
love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into
the world, that we might live through him." 1 John 4:9 "Whosoever
believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that
loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him." 1
John 5: 1). The "peace" that comes
from homogenized permissiveness (consensus) is an orgy of
sensuousness (the soul influenced and controlled by the flesh).
Man, at-one-with the world, is a lover of pleasure (via. dialoguing
feelings and thoughts, whether to himself or to others―of his own sensuousness, 'driven' by
and 'purposed' in dopamine emancipation) more than a lover
of God (via. preaching and teaching truth―according
to His Word, in His
righteousness, by His Holy Spirit, in His love).
Those of this life can only have hope in happiness, pleasure,
"enjoyment," etc. while the believer's hope is in the glory of the Lord, i.e.
that which is not of this world, not of this life alone, evidenced by the
joy unspeakable, peace that transcends understanding, love that is not
of this
world, of His Spirit. The hope of dialectic man is in this
world of sensuousness alone, this life alone, evidenced by the lust of
his flesh, lust of his eyes,
and the pride of his life, i.e. his desire to control the environment for the
sake of his own and other's "enjoyment," i.e. pleasure, i.e.
dopamine emancipation. Without the hope of glory (revealed to man
by the law and the prophets, the Lord, i.e. His Word, and the Holy Spirit) all that man has
is his dialectic 'reasoning' abilities to 'justify' his own sensuous
nature. The apostle Paul noted two things about having "hope in
Christ," regarding this life only: one is that we are all "miserable,"
missing out on the things of the world when we did not have to (if this
life is all that there is), and that those who are not missing out are
"miserable" as well, i.e. being never satisfied. "If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we
are of all men most miserable." 1 Corinthians 15:19 But,
because we have "hope in Christ" not only in this life but also in the
life which is to come (in Him), by the fruit of the Spirit we are in
truth not "miserable," but rejoicing in all things, which the
world can not understand, having only dopamine emancipation of
the flesh (of his sensuousness) and not the Holy Spirit of God
(of His righteousness). The temporal man must find or
create an environment which is conducive to dopamine emancipation,
his hope is in creating a "better" world (a world of sensuous
pleasure/"enjoyment") in which to live for himself and for others, while
the man made new in Christ has the Joy of the Lord, therefore, no
matter what environment he finds himself in, whether in pleasure or in
pain or anything in between, his hope is not in this world, in this
life, i.e. in himself or his fellow man, but in Christ alone.
While he makes the world a better place to live within, loving and
caring for others, that is not his 'drive' nor his 'purpose,' the works
being only a byproduct of God's love in Him, the fruit of the Spirit,
the result of his knowing and following the Lord Jesus Christ, i.e.
walking in the Spirit which is not of this world (being in the world,
blessing it, but not of the world, justifying it). Otherwise, his
works, engendered from his own sensuousness, even done for good,
being of no eternal value or worth simply pass away as the world passes
away, not being engendered from the Lord, by the Holy Spirit,
according to the Fathers will.
The church has, as the children of Israel, imbibed in the
Midianitish women (of their sensuousness, of sight and lust, i.e.
in the "enjoyment" of the 'moment') instead of the Word of the
Lord (of His righteousness, of faith and truth, enduring to the
end), placing their hope in their own
sensuousness and in their own speculations or 'reasoning'
abilities, rather than in His righteousness, i.e. in the Word of
the Lord (in He who is righteous). By means of
speculation (human 'reasoning,' i.e. 'self-justification'), sensuousness is liberated
from the restraints of righteousness, and likewise, by means of
sensuousness ("ought," i.e. "lust" given a voice in dialogue and
then acted out, i.e. thought and action, i.e. theory and practice
united, i.e. "lust," i.e. emotion and motion reunited), speculation
('reasoning') is liberated from the restraints
of righteousness, and thereby man is liberated from "faith,"
from "love of God," from "will in Christ," from
"because the Lord said," to become himself again (to
become what he was, a child of sensuousness and spontaneity,
prior to parental commands and restraints). As Karl Marx understood it,
"The unspeculative Christian also recognizes
sensuality
as long as it does not assert itself at the expense of true reason, i.e., of
faith, of true love, i.e., of love of God, of true will-power, i.e., of will
in Christ. Not for the sake of sensual love, not for the lust of the
flesh, but because the Lord said: Increase and multiply." (Karl Marx, The Holy Family)
He knew that it was righteousness
(that which can only be imputed by Christ, the obedient Son of
the Heavenly Father, to men of faith in Him) which had to be negated if man was to become himself,
become only of nature, only of sensuousness, and that it was
dialectic 'reasoning' which was the only means to achieve it. He knew
it was the only mean's whereby to negate righteousness,
that speculation and sensuousness (human 'reasoning' and
human behavior) had to be united as one in an experiential, i.e.
sensuous and spontaneous 'moment'―consensus,
even doing so in "the name of the Lord." The dialectic
'method' being, instead of cursing the children of Israel (instead of
fighting against the religious, inflecting them with pain which tends to
strengthen their resolve to stand) assist them in actualizing the "good
life" (join with them and "help" them in achieving their "goals," assist
them in augmenting pleasure and attenuating pain, on their way to the
"promised land"). Satan, instead of fighting the church, joined
with it, through the department of administration, sensuously and
'rationally,' facilitated it in the praxis of "growing" itself,
even doing so (deceitfully) "in the name of the Lord," i.e. baiting with
the name of the Lord and then switching to building and maintaining
unity on human relationships, i.e. in man's sensuousness instead
of establishing unity upon doctrine, i.e. upon the Lord's
righteousness alone.
It is
for the believer to endure the temptations of this life, to endure the
testing of his faith, (to willingly "miss out on" the pleasures of this
world, i.e. "pleasures" which are now coming from the "contemporary
church," to suffer as Christ suffered―persecuted by the religious,
i.e. the dialectic 'reasoning'
establishment of his day) that he may attain the hope of the Glory of the Lord. It is
not a world of pleasure ("enjoyment," sensuousness) that the Lord has called the
believer and the church (the assembly of believers) to imbibe in, it is,
as a faithful bride, to reject the pleasures (temptations) of this life,
awaiting her groom, remaining spotless and without wrinkle, living in
His righteousness, walking in His Spirit. The two or three coming together in His
name, in His righteousness, do not do so for the sake of
sensuousness, for the "feeling" of oneness, i.e. for the sake of the "feeling" of brotherhood, but
do so
for the sake of each believers eternal life (to encourage and to
admonish one another in the word of God, to worship the Lord, and to reprove any who return to disobedience) that all may endure in Him, i.e.
remain in His
righteousness, not loving the pleasures of this life but instead
loving the Lord to the end ("to the death."
Revelation 12:11).
"Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove,
rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine." 2 Timothy
4:2
It is not that God is against pleasure. He wants us to have
pleasure. He created us that we can have it. It is that we are not
to put pleasure before Him. Something we, like children, have a
propensity to do, being, by nature, subject to our carnal nature. Without the
chastening we will not turn to righteousness as the right way of
thinking and acting, the system of Righteousness only being a type, or shadow,
or system, or culture found within (and engendered from) the traditional family, true
righteousness (eternal life) only being found in the Lord, i.e. only
of God.
Therefore, whether it be the person, the "village," the
nation, or the church, by moving man's focus to the hope of creating a
"better" life here, created through human effort, and away from the
perfect life to come, created only by the Lord, (not that making the
world a "better" place is bad, it just is not going to save man, i.e. it
has no eternal
value), man has placed his own sensuousness (his carnal nature)
in front of the righteousness of God (the will of God) and has
chosen a life of the 'spirit' of man (seeking after social harmony, i.e.
uniting upon "the approval of men," which
is an illusion since all men, in and of themselves, are vain) instead of a life of the Spirit
of God (which is true peace, joy, love, and life). The
spirit of man, his seeking for oneness with his own nature, of
sensuousness, is of the world while the spirit of God, directing man
to become at-one-with God (not equal with but in agreement with, being
subject to, directed by), in His righteousness, through Christ
and the Holy Spirit is not of the world. World unity, the "new"
world order is of the spirit of
antichrist (of another Christ, of another gospel, of fallen man seeking
oneness with the world, with nature, according to his own sensuousness and
'reasoning' abilities). George Hegel stated it this way:
"Spirit, in so far as it
is the Spirit of God, is not a spirit beyond the stars, beyond the
world. [Therefore it is not of righteousness.]
On the contrary, God is present, omnipresent, and exists as
spirit in all spirits." ["God" is therefore of sensuousness
and spontaneity united, and is made manifest through
human nature seeking 'organic' (emotion-motion) unity with the world and
therefore is dialectic 'reasoning' itself which makes a "life" of
"love," i.e. "enjoyment," i.e. "lust" possible]. (George Hegel) The "contemporary"
church is the greatest offender of
righteousness, being the greatest ambassador for
sensuousness, for the sake of social unity (unity built upon
that which is common to man, i.e. human nature, removing that which is
not common to―not engendered from―mankind, i.e. removing that which is
not engendered from human nature, i.e. removing that which causes
division, dissention, divisiveness, amongst men, i.e. negating
that which is the source of discrimination, i.e. negating that
which is judgmental and thus the source of anxiety, i.e. fear of being or doing wrong and being punished
or chastened for it or fear of being wrong by "offending" someone by
speaking the truth in love, i.e. reproving someone of sin, i.e. speaking
the truth according to the word of God, etc.), i.e. negating
righteousness for the sake
of "growing" the church. Dialectically making the world agreeable (acceptable) to the
church and thereby the
church agreeable (acceptable) by the world.
The spirit of God (who is righteous) divides the
redeemed man (who is made righteous in Christ by his faith in
Him alone) from the unredeemed man (those who remain subject to their own sensuousness, subject to
the love of this world). The "spirit" of man (that which of the
world, seeking sensuous unity with the world, i.e. man's natural
desire for "the approval of men") divides man (the unredeemed
man, i.e.
those who love the world more than God) from God (the redeemer, who
separates man from the world and its ways, i.e. separates the redeemed
man from the world of self-social
justification, the world built upon man's 'quest' for the "enjoyment" of
this world, by changing man's heart to where he is now seeking after
"the approval of God," i.e. living and walking in the
righteousness of Christ). Man, deceived, believes he can,
by himself, by living according to the "books" of his
understanding, written in support of human nature (and thus
negating in his own mind and in his own actions God's judgment
upon him for his sin, for his disobedience against God's will, i.e. judgment justified
according to the righteousness of God), i.e. by thinking, according to
dialectic 'reasoning,' that he can justify his self 'justification' through
'justified' sensuous social action (evaluating right and wrong
according to his own human eyes, thinking his 'good' works for mankind
makes him 'good,' i.e. gives him worth, i.e. 'purpose,' thus becoming 'righteous' in his own
eyes). Through the use of fables, i.e. the art of illusion (through the
'aesthetic' dimension), i.e. the imagination of the heart, i.e.
internally perceiving how the world "ought to be" in his mind, i.e. a
world free from chastening (a world not subject to the evaluation and
"judgmentalism" of righteousness), initiates and sustains the
process of liberating sensuousness (the child within, i.e. the
impulses of the present 'driving' the present, creating the future) from
the restraints of righteousness (from the parent without, i.e.
from the commands and promises of the past directing the present,
determining the future). The further from the parent's commands
the mind wanders, the freer the person find himself (and the less value
the parent and his commands have regarding the present and the future).
"The value of a thought is measured by its distance from the
continuity of the familiar. It is objectively devalued as this
distance is reduced." (Stephen Eric Bronner, Of
Critical Theory and Its Theorists) According to dialectic
'reasoning,' freedom is found in that which mankind has in common
with himself, i.e. in his own sensuousness, (social duty
therefore becomes his highest calling, fulfilling his "potential"),
bondage is found in that which divides, i.e. "alienates" man from
himself and therefore divides him from the world. Bondage,
according to dialectic 'reasoning,' is therefore found in
righteousness. Freedom, according to dialectic 'reasoning,' is
therefore "freedom from righteousness."
God, on the other hand, who is righteous, justifies man
according to His righteousness, righteousness which can
only be imputed by God Himself to man, i.e. to men of faith in
the Lord Jesus Christ alone, imputed by He who was in the world,
but was not of the world, redeeming man from his sinful nature, i.e.
from his
disobedience against God, and thus redeeming man from God's judgment
upon him, that all glorying would be in God the creator and not in man
the created. Man, following after the spirit of darkness,
following after the way of dialectic 'reasoning,' wanting the glorying
to be in and of himself, i.e. "Look what we have done, by working
together in Jesus name, for us and God" and not in God alone, i.e. in
His name alone, according to His word alone, by faith in Him alone, and
by His grace alone, "that no man may boast").
As the fruit, giving evidence of the type of plant, is a
byproduct of being attached to the vine, the fellowshipping of the
saints in love, giving evidence of Christ in their "midst," is a
byproduct of each believer being in Christ, loving righteousness.
This is not the witness of the "contemporary" church, i.e.
"being in
Christ" instead giving evidence of 'justifying' (tolerating) man's
carnal nature in its midst, thereby bearing witness to its source, man's
carnal nature, i.e. man's love of his own sensuousness.
"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but
rather reprove them." Ephesians 5:11
Not until I recognized that I was wicked, a man of sin, exposed and
condemned by to the law of God (and still am wicked apart
from Christ in me, His righteousness imputed to me by my faith in
Him alone―being the temple of the Holy Spirit does not mean that
the temple sanctifies, i.e. makes Holy, the Spirit, but rather that the
Spirit sanctifies the temple, i.e. makes it Holy), i.e. that I was condemned to eternal damnation by my
creator, who is holy, pure, and righteous, did I realize that I
have no 'good' within me, no righteousness
within me whereby to redeem myself from His wrath. Not until I
knew of and acknowledged the wickedness and deceitfulness of my own heart
did I come to know that I could only be saved by the work of God
alone, by the blood of the Lamb of God alone, by His righteousness
imputed to me only through my faith in Him, i.e. by faith
in Him alone. All men are wicked, deceived in believing
that they are 'good' or have the potential of becoming 'good,' i.e.
given the right conditions, education, doing the right things, etc.
It is in this lie that dialectic 'reasoning' finds its identity and
'purpose,' i.e. in human nature, in man "redeeming" himself from the
righteousness
of God. This is the spirit of the Antichrist. Apart from the
righteousness
of Christ and the presence of the Holy Spirit, all I have is the
'spirit' of fallen man (the spirit of wickedness, the spirit of the
"prince of the power of the air"), "redeeming" me from the wrath of God,
i.e. "redeeming" me from the knowledge of my sin, "redeeming" me from
God's righteousness, and "redeeming" me from the coming judgment
by God upon me for continuing to live in sin, i.e. living according to
my human nature, i.e. 'justifying' it through dialectic 'reasoning.' Through dialectic
'reasoning' man's focus is 'changed' from looking above, seeking after
righteousness (coming to know the Heavenly Father of the only
begotten Son, Jesus Christ, who obeyed His Heavenly Father to his death
on the cross, who raised him from the grave, who ascended to be with His
Heavenly Father that both could send the Holy Spirit to be our
comforter, that we to might be able to endure to the end―"But he that
shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved." Matthew
24:13; endure the rejection of men, endure hatred received from the
world for persisting in preaching and teaching Christ, i.e. man's
wickedness, man's love of his sensuousness, and Christ's love of
His Heavenly Father, His obedience to His Heavenly Father's will to the
death, His righteousness), to looking and living below, man justifying his
sensuous nature, justifying his unrighteousness, justifying his
"enjoyment" of this life, encouraging himself in working with other men in
and of the world, making it a "better" place to live within for all
mankind, that it is here, in this world, working in unity with other
men, living in the spirit of consensus, with man working with man
for man, that he can 'discover' his identity, fulfill his 'purpose,'
no longer recognizing sin, righteousness, and judgment (no longer
recognizing that which is not in common with mankind and thus is not of
this world, i.e. negating that which divides man from man, i.e.
negating righteousness) as an
issue of life. This kind of thinking is communism, i.e.
common-ism, now referred to as communitarianism, democratization,
conscietization, synergism, etc. “A new emphasis on civic
participation and social interaction alone seemed capable of confronting
the crisis [the "crisis" being individuals "‘out of touch’
with their own feelings and those of others as well" because of the
system of Righteousness and its "obey or else" paradigm
making righteousness, not sensuousness the bases for truth
and life]. And, that
is precisely what Fromm provided in his notion of ‘communitarian
socialism.’” (Stephen Eric Bronner, Of
Critical Theory and Its Theorists) bracketed information
added
The names just keep coming
but the process is the same, man 'justifying' himself before man, highly
esteeming himself and the things of this world, wickedly and deceitfully
'justifying' his own heart, 'justifying' the praxis of
abomination, seeking to negate the Spirit of God, and those
who walk in the Spirit of God, by actualizing in every man's soul the
"spirit" of the world, the "spirit of unity," through the praxis
of consensus ("self-actualizing" in every man the spirit of
oneness). According to dialectic 'reasoning,' without
righteousness (without a higher authority than human nature,
restraining the impulses of the sensuous, consensus
'moment') there would be no sin (disobedience to a higher authority than
nature, i.e. higher than the stimulus-response nature of nature) and
there would be no fear of judgment (fear of chastening, i.e.
accountability for one's natural behavior to that which is not of human
nature) as the issue of life. Therefore by removing or negating
the fear of judgment (negating chastening or fear of chastening,
i.e. accountability for one's natural thoughts and actions which go
counter to the will of a higher authority) you can remove or negate
sin (negate disobedience to a higher authority than human nature)
and negate righteousness (negate recognition of a
higher authority than human nature itself) as being the issue of life.
In this way the spirit of sensuousness (of
pleasure, the "enjoyment" of oneness in the praxis of
pleasure, i.e. "the approval of men" in sensual harmony) supersedes the
spirit of righteousness (of God, the joy of the Spirit, which is
unspeakable, i.e. unexplainable to unredeemed man).
"Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you
that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come
unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. And when he is
come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of
judgment: Of sin, because they believe not on me; Of righteousness,
because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; Of judgment,
because the prince of this world is judged. I have yet many things
to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the
Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he
shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall
he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall
glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto
you. All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I,
that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you."
John 16:7-15.
Sin, righteousness, and judgment go hand in hand. Sin because of
man's disobedience to the Father's will, refusing to recognize his wickedness,
and rejecting His Son's work for the remission of his sin, righteousness
because of Christ's obedience to the Father while on the earth, his
obedience to the death,
and returning to be with the Father, continuing in obedience, and judgment upon Satan and
his followers, i.e. "the children of disobedience," because
they followed him in refusing to worship and trust in the Lord. In the end it is all about
the Father (who loves us), the son (who loves and obeys His Heavenly
Father, even to the death), and the Holy Spirit (who instills within us
God's love, power, and clear mind). Sensuousness
(flesh) will pass away, i.e. those of it (of the world) being condemned
forever, but those in the righteousness of Christ, i.e. Christ's
righteousness imputed to them by their faith in Him, will
live forever. Why then are we so infatuated with how
people "feel" about us and what they "think" about us
(wanting "the approval of men") when on that day of judgment
men's opinions will not matter. It is who we know (the
Lord) and how we live (in His righteousness), i.e. not what
happens to us or how people treat us in this life (in this life of
sensuousness―whether in pleasure or in pain, whether they
"like us or not") that matters in the end.
If we don't start with
righteousness as being the issue of life, then we can not see
above the fray of the sensuous 'moment' and know who we are and
where we are going and turn from our wicked ways (be redeemed from
eternal damnation).
"Wherein in time past
ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince
of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of
disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past
in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of
the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others."
Ephesians 2:2,3 "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot
inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit
incorruption." 1 Corinthians 15:50 "For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,)
dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to
perform that which is good I find not." Romans 7:18 "So then they that are in the flesh cannot please
God." Romans 8:8 "For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die:
but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye
shall live." Romans 8:13 "But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make
not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof."
Romans 13:14
"For he that soweth to his
flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the
Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting." Galatians
6:8
"This I say then, Walk in the
Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. For the
flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh:
and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do
the things that ye would. But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye
are not under the law. Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these;
Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry,
witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions,
heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like:
of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time
past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom
of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace,
longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance:
against such there is no law. And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the
affections and lusts. If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in
the Spirit. Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one
another, envying one another.'' Galatians 5:16-26
"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,
but to the will of God." 1 Peter 4:1,2 "For ye are bought
with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit,
which are God’s." 1 Corinthians 6:20 "And being found in
fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto
death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly
exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in
heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And
that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the
glory of God the Father." Philippians 2:8-11
"Put on the whole
armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of
the devil. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but
against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of
the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high
places. Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye
may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all,
to stand." Ephesians 6:11
When I first spoke just on the mechanism of the dialectic
process (just stayed academic), many listened. Then, when I spoke on the rebellious
nature of man (his "ought," his desire for sensuousness,
his propensity toward sin), which
the dialectic seeks to 'justify,' not as many listened (Christians began
to cancel meetings because I "offended," by my preaching of the gospel,
those they needed to work with in winning social issue). Now that I
speak on righteousness, what the dialectic process is all about
(the negation of righteousness as being the issue of life
that is), few listen.
It is here, on the issue of righteousness,
that the individual, the family, the workplace, the government
(politics), and the church, all reside. Yet they have all become
captive to dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. almost all men everywhere are
fully involved in self-social 'justification' instead of taking "into
captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ."
2 Corinthians 10:5
Being subject to the opinions of men only (where there resides no
conviction, contrition, and repentance), few are now teachable.
They, as "children of disobedience," refuse to listen to the truth of their unrighteousness.
If you have not noticed: righteousness and the system
of the father figure ruling over the home go hand in hand. You see
it in the life of Christ, His obedience to His Heavenly Father.
Therefore, by making all, i.e. the father, the mother, and the children
equal in the family, the tradition, patriarchal family, i.e. the
top-down, family system of God and man is negated and the issue
of man's sin, i.e. his disobedience before God or parent above becomes
moot. In fact, the negation of the traditional family
system, the negation of belief in God the father of commands, the
son of obedience, and the holy spirit of conveying information and
making it understood, and the
negation of righteousness do go hand in hand. By making
all things equal through human "eyes," i.e. by 'reasoning' through
sensuousness, all (both man and God) become equal in 'purpose,' i.e.
the augmentation of the pleasures of this life. All that can
become one, i.e. all that is of worth, therefore is from and is for
common-ism AKA communism (the forceful or psychological removal of
anything which distracts from, blocks, inhibits, or supersedes the
approach pleasure-avoid pain, stimulus-response nature of man). Hegel defined the "contemporary"
(community, i.e. common-unity AKA communitarian) home in this way:
"On account of
the absolute and natural oneness of the husband, the wife, and the child
[all are carnal in nature, therefore oneness can only be found in the
carnal nature of man, i.e. if all are sinners, then sin is "common human
behavior" and should be recognized, tolerated, respected, and encouraged
as being "normal"],
where there is no antithesis of person to person or of subject to
object [there is no top-down system in sensuousness, only a
gradient of "contemporary" conditions engendering pain or pleasure in
the 'moment,' with the 'purpose' of life being the augmentation of
pleasure and the attenuation of pain],
the surplus is not the property of one of them
[the father can not 'rule' over anything, i.e. land, or anyone, i.e.
people], since their
indifference is not a formal or a legal one [his authority is not permanently established
by a higher authority since there is no higher authority other than the
sensuousness of man's nature, therefore there is
no righteousness, i.e. therefore Jesus returning to be with the father, i.e.
the Father raising Him from the grave by the power of the Holy Spirit
is therefore only an illusion or a fable created by those of the
system of righteousness, which has to be negated in
man's personal thoughts and community actions if he is to become
"normal," i.e. experience "guiltlessly" carnal (adulterous, homosexual,
etc.) behavior
again]. So too all contracts
regarding property or service and the like fall away here because these
things are grounded in the presupposition of private personality [individuality engendered from the 'right' of authority
is negated,
i.e. your soul created by God is of no worth, i.e. read: you
have no worth or 'right' outside of the universal, i.e. the social, since you are only of
the universal and therefore have not right of private which interferes
with the public or social "felt" needs of the time, i.e. of
social "felt" needs in the 'moment'].
Instead the surplus, labour, and property are absolutely common to all,
inherently and explicitly [Hegel sounds like Marx, or rather, Marx
sounds like Hegel, doesn't He―sounds like "contemporary" government
leadership today as well]."
(George Hegel, System of Ethical Life) bracketed information added
psychology, sociology, anthropology, ("Blooms' Taxonomies" and thus the
American classrooms), etc. are all "grounded" upon this carnal
"democratic" ideology.
America is now "grounded" upon this ideology, calling it "democracy,"
going into a debtors grave as it crams "make the world safe for
'democracy'" (AKA communism) down every nation's throat, in the name of
"social harmony and world peace." Therefore righteousness
(top-down patriarchal authority) is out and sensuousness (consensus,
one world government) is in, as
the way of life.
It
is therefore evident that dialectic 'reasoning' has been very
successful, i.e. the community minded individual, the community
minded family, the
community minded workplace,
the community minded government, the community minded church, i.e. the "contemporary" Christian and the
"contemporary" church, having made sensuousness (man) instead of
righteousness (God) the issue of life. Man is therefore deceived into
believing that he can have both, man (sensuousness) and God (righteousness), in harmony (subject to his
sensuousness), when in truth he can only have (be of)
either one, of man, of his own sensuousness
or in the other, in God, in His righteousness.
"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. 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. And the world passeth away, and the
lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever."
1 John 2:15-18.
"Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live
soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;" Titus
2:12 "I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated
them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world."
John 17:14 The Lord imputes
His righteousness unto men of faith in Him alone (the oneness
being in Him in His Father, in righteousness―read all of John 17
for the full picture of Christ's love for and obedience to His Heavenly
Father, that he desires all men to know). Therefore
there is
no "equality" of sensuousness with God, only "inherited"-ship of His
righteousness, i.e. all under the Father's righteous rule,
i.e. why the redeemed and the unredeemed both get new spiritual bodies, with the sensuous
body cast aside, those of unrighteousness spending eternity in Hell,
being cast into the fire which is never quenched, and those made
righteous in Christ spending eternity in His glory, in the glory of His
Heavenly Father. Therefore the true meaning of the resurrection and the
rapture get lost in dialectic 'reasoning.' Enlightened Christians, think
that it is all
about the pleasures of the body (missing out on an experience of pain as
God raptures them out for
a better life of sensuousness), when in truth
it is the denying of their "lustful," sinful nature in this life, only
made possible, i.e. endurable, in Christ (in His righteousness)
and by the power of the Holy Spirit (by His Love and His Power) which makes the
resurrection and the rapture understandable. It is this
misunderstanding which has lead to the persecution of believers (who
fear God and love His Word, those of faith) by the "contemporary"
apostate church's of today (which builds its identity upon "growth" and
numbers, those of sight).
It is also very evident, that
the preaching and teaching of righteousness, which
used to be in the family, the workplace, the government, and the church
will make you very unwanted, with few listening to you, especially those
who have had training in 'listening' skills, in "relationship building
skills" (in dialectic 'reasoning').
In the end you may stand alone, but in truth, in Christ you are never
alone, only rejected by those of the world (of sensuousness).
As Jesus was acquainted with grief, you will be also―grief being, you have
no control over the situation, i.e. few listened to the truth of His
righteousness, i.e. believed upon Him in His day, but some heard,
believed, and were saved. Few will listen to Him in you,
preaching and teaching of His righteousness, today but
some will hear, believe, and be saved.
Repentance, salvation ("the Lord add[ing] to the church daily such as should be saved."
Acts 2: 47) through
the preaching and teaching of His Word is anathema to
"empowerment," consensus, and the "growing of the Church" through
marketing techniques, i.e. though polls, surveys, feasibility
studies, and synergistic programming used in the apostate
churches of today, i.e. engendering the dialoguing of men's opinions and
theories and putting them into social action, known as praxis,
i.e. "theory and practice" (which is of the world system).
If the conscience is a product of chastening, and chastening is a
product of the Father, then the conscience is a product of the Father.
If the super-ego is a product of the "fear of rejection" by man and the
"fear of rejection" by men is a product of society then the super-ego is
a product of society. It is the "divide and conquer" nature of the
dialectic process, dividing (coming between) the children and the
father, a man and his conscience, the creator and the created,
overcoming the belief-action dichotomy between righteousness and
sensuousness (which can only be resolved through the
righteousness of Christ, i.e. by his obedience, even to death, to
His Heavenly Father imputed to men of faith in Him), etc., that the
children, man, the created, belief, righteousness, etc., are
conquered in the praxis of creating and sustaining social
harmony, i.e. in the praxis of "building human relationship
according to the "felt" needs of sensuous, carnal man (according
to his sinful nature, i.e. his human nature), i.e. in the praxis
of dialoguing opinions to achieve consensus (sensuous
oneness with man). There is no "my child, not yours," "my
property, not yours," "my business, not yours,," "my family, not yours,"
etc. i.e. creator-created, i.e. sovereignty, in the dialoguing of
opinions to a consensus upon human nature, i.e. upon "man's
"felt" need for "enjoyment," i.e. for the pleasures of this life, over
and against the righteousness of God.
Few will come out of the "emergent church," i.e. the harlot
church, having sold their souls to the sensuousness of
'righteousness' (the sensuous experience of worship, i.e. worshiping the
experience of worship, i.e. "corporate" worship) or rather the 'righteousness' of sensuousness
(where if it did not make you or others "feel" good, i.e.
sensuously prosper you in
this life, it was not of God).
The true church is of Christ, personal, for each individual soul in the
assembly (His righteousness imputed to those of faith in
Him―the fellowship of "believer's," i.e. individual believers who come
together―believers being the emphasis, not things in common,
who hold everything in common in Him, "And all that believed
were together, and had all things common;"
Acts 2:44―the "had all things common" being a
"byproduct" of "believers" having come "together,"
i.e. "things common" being out of their individual's will to be
pleasing to God, directed by His Spirit of Love, as believers in righteousness, i.e. their
actions being out of His righteousness, and not due to the
dynamics of the group to "have the approval of men," i.e. not out
of their sensuousness, i.e. not 'driven' by the pressure of or
'purposed' in the use of group dynamics, i.e. not 'driven' by the desire
to have "the approval of men" and not 'purposed' in actualizing
"the approval of men" in others, i.e. not 'driven' out of and
'purposed' in actualizing their own sensuousness or worth), the
other church is collective, of the social (engendered from man's
sensuousness and 'reasoning' abilities―manipulative abilities―i.e.
his 'righteousness' actualized by his "feeling" of oneness in
praxis―"having all things in common" is their belief,
i.e. common-ism, AKA communism, i.e. 'driven' by and 'purposed' in the
use of group dynamics and cognitive dissonance, i.e. building upon man's carnal, i.e. sensuous
desire to have "the approval of men," i.e.
putting down doctrine, i.e. that which is not of and inhibits
sensuousness, to actualize it―a subtle 'change' having
major consequences). It is no wonder most ministers have refused
to allow me to share this subject (exposing Satan's devices) in "their"
churches, exposing, upsetting, and ruining their "business"
praxis (exposing their marketing methods―the dialectic process they
praxis―which they use in "growing" their
sensuous based, i.e. multi-screened, celebrating, "experiencing
God," i.e. experiencing and worshiping the "feeling" of oneness,
consensus 'driven/purposed,' dialoguing of opinions―so
that everyone can "feel better about themselves and be less offensive
to others," i.e. participate in the experience of "oneness"―"contemporary,"
i.e. with the temporary, i.e. tolerant of the carnal nature of man,
"group hug," cosmic Jesus, i.e. "non-offensive, user-friendly,
readily adaptable to 'change' Jesus," apostate church).
The true church, the bride of Christ, is none of these, being only in
(into) Him.
Whether it be the home, the school, the workplace, the town
hall meeting, the church, by 'changing' the environment which is used to
set policy, i.e. how right from wrong is decided, 'changes' the way a
person thinks and acts, i.e. produces a paradigm shift or 'change'
in the persons participating.
An environment of preaching and teaching, inculcating
categorical imperatives, with the use of chastening or threat of force
to reinforce them, correlates to a system of righteousness,
i.e. initiating and sustaining a right-wrong way of thinking and acting, i.e.
engendering a patriarchal paradigm. While cults may appear to use
this system, they in truth use the "fear of rejection of men," i.e. the
dialectic process, to initiate and sustain control over their "members,"
not allowing "their members" to use the Word of God to correct their
errors, i.e. their sins, that is the sins of those in leadership. By simply changing the
environment of the home,
classroom, workplace, government, church to one where policy
is decided thought the dialoguing of opinions to
consensus, i.e. according to human 'reasoning,' the paradigm (or way of thinking and acting) of the
participants are 'changed' to a system of sensuousness and
human 'reasoning,' i.e. to a heresiarchal paradigm of 'changingness.'
This is the genius (if you want to call it that) of dialectic
'reasoning.' Without the use of outright force (as traditional
parent's used to be allowed to do, even in public, i.e. chastening their own children when they
were disobedient to the parents commands), which would only
initiate the patriarchal paradigm of "intolerance to ambiguity" and
sustain a resistance to 'change,' by simply using the force of group dynamics,
i.e. the fear of "losing the approval of men" ("What is
going to happen to me, my family, my business, my friendships if I loose
the 'village's' respect and support," i.e. so I can do what I want to do), the patriarchal paradigm
is negated by the individual's (the traditional parents and their
children) 'willful' participating in the
heresiarchal paradigm of "tolerance of ambiguity" and the desire for and
the approval of 'change,' i.e. the desire for those things which are
anathema to righteousness, i.e. which are of the flesh, i.e.
which is
of sensuousness. In this way, in the dialectic way, i.e. through the covert,
"positive"
way of thinking and acting, all facets of society are changed without the use of outright
force
(overt force, negative force field of wrong being chastened) being used against the individual, the parent's
'willfully' (out of their fear of rejection by men, having abdicated their fear of
rejection by God because of their love for the things of this world) abdicated their
sovereignty (which can only come through God) by their willful participation in the process of 'change'
for the sake of "the approval of the village,'" i.e. to keep "control"
over their children―which they just lost to the "village," i.e. the
community "cause" now supersedes their "Because I said so"
within their family. "...
once you can identify a community
[behavior that the parents are 'willing' to tolerate (or secretly desire
to participate in) to initiate or sustain relationship with one another, behavior
which they restrain within their families],
you have discovered the primary unity of society above the individual and
the family that can be mobilized ... to bring about positive social change." (Dr.
Robert Trojanowicz Community Policing The meaning of
“Community” in Community Policing)
"Parental discipline, religious denunciation of
bodily pleasure, . . . have all left man overly docile, but secretly
in his unconscious unconvinced, and therefore neurotic." "The
bondage of all cultures to their cultural heritage is a neurotic
construction." "Neurotic symptoms, with their fixations on
perversions and obscenities, demonstrate the refusal of the
unconscious essence of our being to acquiesce in the dualism of
flesh and spirit, higher and lower." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death:
The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)
"The individual may have ‘secret’ thoughts which he will under no circumstances reveal to
anyone else if he can help it. To gain access is particularly
important, for here may lie the individual’s potential." (Theodor Adorno,
The Authoritarian Personality) With the peoples
concerns having been 'changed' to the issue of sensuousness
(focusing upon "the family," i.e. the children and the mother's "feelings,"
i.e. no longer recognizing and respecting, i.e. honoring, the father as
the sole or final arbiter of right and wrong in the family, but instead recognizing and focusing upon the
rebellious child's or wife's "feelings," i.e. focusing upon who or what is engendering the
rebellious nature of the children, their dissatisfactions,
i.e. the understood source being the "authoritative" parent,
i.e. the "authoritarian" father or husband), the
issue of righteousness (the authority of the parent, as a type
and shadow of God, i.e. established by God to set standards for the children and then use
their power to enforce
them, i.e. being the author and the authority over what is right and
what is wrong, what is good and what is evil) is thereby negated. Those of
righteousness (of faith) are thereafter treated not only as being
'irrational' (when they persist in voicing in meetings the issue of
righteousness, i.e. preventing their children from 'changing' in a
'rapidly changing world'), but are also thereafter treated as being
'irrelevant' (in a now "sense perceived" world of 'rapid change,'
i.e. a world of sensuousness, the heart of man as well as the child, i.e. the heart of deceitfulness and wickedness,
is now no longer "sense perceived" as being an issue of
eternal concern, i.e. of eternal life or eternal death, i.e. of the
"there-and-then" with God and righteousness as the focus of life,
since eternal concerns have now become "contemporary," of pleasure or
pain, i.e. of the "here-and-now" with man and his sensuous needs,
i.e. his "felt" needs as the focus of life,
i.e. "If it feel's good, just do it." "Boys will be boys."
"I'm OK. You're OK." "Can't we all just get along?").
By
simply changing the learning environment (policy setting
environment) from one of
preaching and teaching truth and giving commands (to be obeyed
"as given or else" which engenders a top-down patriarchal
paradigm where truth is not dependent upon the sensuous 'moment') to one of dialoguing opinions to a
consensus (where "truth" is finding "common ground"
through "feelings"
and "thoughts" which engenders an equality
matriarchal-heresiarchal paradigm, i.e. "Truth is a 'moment' in correct praxis"
Gramsci) a persons paradigm is changed,' i.e. his affections
'shift' from looking above (pursing righteousness, i.e.
pursuing "the approval of God" or "the approval of the father") to
looking below (pursuing sensuousness, i.e. pursuing "the approval
of men," i.e. "the approval of the 'group'").
"The shift in perspective from
God to human beings" takes place in an environment in which
men dialogue their opinions to come to the "truth."
"The epistemic authority of the God’s eye view" is "devalued"
and "moral commands lose
their religious as well as their metaphysical foundation"
within an environment of dialogue, i.e. in an environment where
men determine right from wrong according to their opinions.
(Jürgen Habermas, Communicative Ethics The inclusion of the
Other) Before coming into the consensus room (into the process
of 'change,' of sensuousness, i.e. situation ethics, i.e.
stimulus-response) the
person is dissatisfied with their behavior (dissatisfied
with their behavior which dissatisfies or disappoints their parents or God),
i.e. dissatisfied with their behavior which comes between
them and their father (where they acquire their belief, their thesis,
their position, their justification) but in the
consensus room
(during their participation in the dialoguing, i.e. dialectic process of 'change,' of
sensuousness) they become
dissatisfied with their belief (dissatisfied in their belief
which
dissatisfies, i.e. disappoints the group, the
brotherhood, the community, i.e. dissatisfied in their belief which
prevents the individuals in the room from coming into common-unity, i.e.
community, which can only be engendered from
sensuousness, i.e. from that which all individuals have in common), i.e.
they become
dissatisfied in the system of belief itself (dissatisfied with their parent's or God's commands
and therefore dissatisfied with parental or Godly authority) which comes between them and
other's. Only through dialoguing their opinions,
'discover' their common behavior (common sensuousness) and their
common dissatisfaction with belief (dissatisfied with
their parents or God's uncommon and therefore
alienating, divisive top-down, system of Righteousness)
can the system of Righteousness, and therefore
righteousness itself (engendering a "guilty conscience"), be
negated as an issue of life. By changing the
learning environment from preaching and teaching to
dialoguing opinions, a persons paradigm is 'changed' from
righteousness (focusing upon he who is above, finding pleasure and
purpose in pleasing the parent or God―dialectically perceived as a "substitute
object of gratification" for dopamine emancipation) to sensuousness (focusing
upon that which is below, finding pleasure and 'purpose' in pleasing men
of common interest, i.e. "the group," i.e. the brotherhood, i.e. the
community, i.e. society, i.e. the world―dialectically perceives a
natural "object of gratification" for dopamine emancipation).
"In the dialogic relation of recognizing
oneself in the other, they experience the common ground of their
existence." (Jürgen Habermas, Knowledge & Human Interest)
"Once a member
realizes that others accept him and are trying to understand him, then
he finds it less necessary to hold rigidly to his own beliefs; and he
may be willing to explore previously denied aspects of himself.
One of the most fascinating aspects of group therapy is that
everyone is born again, born together in the group."
(Ervin Yalom, Theory and Practice and
Group Psychotherapy)
Going over it again:
Instead of a person being dissatisfied with their behavior,
i.e. dissatisfied with the system of sensuousness
(approach pleasure-avoid pain),
dissatisfied with their own carnal human (sinful) nature
(Romans
7:14-25) they become dissatisfied with their belief,
i.e. dissatisfied with the system of righteousness
("Thy will, not my will be done"),
dissatisfied with the commands and restraints of higher authority itself
which (who) interfere with their natural desires (Genesis
3:1-6), thus creating a "new" world order born out of
their own sensuousness and dialectic
'reasoning,' a new order of the world where it becomes every citizens duty to negate
the commands and
chastening which restrains theirs and other's carnal human (sinful)
nature (turning the parents in to the "proper authorities" when they are
caught chastening their children), where it is every citizens duty to question authority, i.e.
question everything, thereby negating those conditions which are not engendered from
sensuousness (are not from the Id, are not from human impulse or
mimesis) itself, educating, encouraging,
and supporting the praxis of negating
Hebrews
12:5-11, thus making man (human behavior―sensuousness,
i.e. "enjoyment" negating "repression," i.e. pleasure
negating
pain, i.e. "the children of disobedience" negating
parental authority, the woman in the garden in Eden negating the
"Thou shalt not" of God) the
measure of all things, i.e. determining behavior, whether it is good or evil,
according to man's "felt" (sensuous, carnal, temporal) needs in
the sensuous 'moment,' alone. This has become the agenda of teacher
training on classroom curriculum, i.e. the negation of the
traditional family (the top-down patriarchal system or paradigm or way
of thinking and acting where the Father rules, the
desire of the heart of the wife is to her husband, and the children obey
their parents, in the Lord) and the system of Righteousness it
represents, i.e. initiates and sustains, by negating it in their
children's life experience in the classroom, i.e. by their participation within the dialectic
structured classroom of the dialoguing of opinions to a
consensus (a group grade),
i.e. a classroom now restructured
on sensuousness and dialectic 'reasoning' ("higher order thinking
skills" in morals and ethics). If "Thy will-not my will be
done" (the conscience, the voice of the Father restraining "the
carnal child within," i.e. faith, belief, obedience, and
chastening, i.e. "the approval of God or parent," i.e. that
which is of the system of Righteousness) does not rule
over the approach pleasure-avoid pain carnal nature of the person
then the approach pleasure-avoid pain (the super-ego, the voice
of "the carnal child within," i.e. "the lust of the flesh, the
lust of the eyes, and the pride of life," i.e. "the approval of
men," i.e. that which is of the system of sensuousness)
will. Or in condensed form: if "Thy will, not my will,"
the will of the Father does not rule over the approach pleasure-avoid
pain nature of carnal man then "the lust of the flesh, the lust
of the eyes, and the pride of life," the will of carnal man will.
If the Father does not rule over the child's will, directing him,
restraining him from the things of the world, then the child's will will
justify his thoughts and his actions according to how much pleasure he
can attain from (and augment for) the world, i.e. thereafter he will be
'driven' by and 'purposed' in augmenting the pleasures of this
world, "sense perceiving" and justifying it as being "the will of God,"
i.e. "the will of the people."
The conscience is created and sustained when the parent gives
a child a command of "not," i.e. warns the child as he approaches an "object of gratification"
(which is forbidden by the parent) and is chastened when he seeks
to or continues to relate with it. By the simple act (praxis) of
removing chastening or threat of chastening (removing the "or else though shalt die,"
the "My will be done or else," the "Because I said
so" of the Father) the
dissatisfaction of the parent's command (expressed in the
"ought," i.e. the desire to "touch it," the "My
will be done," the "ought-a," "should-a," "might-a,"
"could-a" of the child) is liberated, i.e. freed to be
expressed, and the persons carnal human nature is freed to be
'rationally,' i.e. dialectically, justified and acted out
(put into praxis) without any sense of guilt or condemnation,
without any sense of higher authority, i.e. without any "Thy will be
done" ruling over, i.e. directing the affairs of life. In fact
any "My will be done or else" not only is negated in the
minds of people (in their thoughts) but is also actively negated
(by force removed) through their social actions (praxis).
Chastening
→ ought → thought → praxis → righteousness.
In this way, sensuousness is liberated from righteousness,
i.e. the fear of God and love for His word is negated as
"vanity" is liberated, i.e. takes its place, i.e. as man
'rationally' becomes 'righteous' in, of, and for himself. By the praxis of
dialectic 'reasoning' the conscience, the fear of chastening (or
judgment), which inhibits a
child's movement toward something in the environment which naturally
attracts him (which is necessary for the engendering of unity within the
world) is negated by the
removal of the authority figure who chastens, not only removing
him from the
environment but also from the mind of the child. The threat of
punishment or chastening is removed from the situation through
the creation of an "open-ended," "non-directed" i.e. "We can
talk about anything." "I'm not going to tell you what is right or wrong
and neither should anyone else." classroom environment. In
this way "ethics,"
doing what is right in the situation based upon "beauty and justice,"
i.e. spontaneous sensuousness and 'justification,' can be engendered from the
sensuous situation rather than from the "non-sensuous"
authority figure. Situation ethics is when sensuousness rather
than righteousness is the source of "ethics," i.e. when
the augmentation of pleasure ("We working for us.") rather than "Not
my will but thy will be done" directs a persons thoughts and
actions. The current
environment rather than God or the parent is therefore the source for determining
what is right and wrong behavior in any given situation.
"The negative valence of a forbidden object which in
itself attracts the child thus usually derives from an induced field
of force of an adult. If this field of force loses its psychological
existence for the child (e.g., if the adult goes away or loses his
authority) the negative valence also disappears." (Kurt Lewin,
A Dynamic Theory of Personality)
The scriptures warn us:
"Vanity of
vanities, saith the preacher; all is vanity." "Let us hear
the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his
commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. For
God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret
thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil." Ecclesiastes
12:8, 13-14
It is not an institution (whether secular or sacred, i.e. including the church, or men, i.e. including
our parents, bosses, judges, or leaders) which we are to fear (they can only
chasten or kill our bodies), we are to fear the lord (who not only has
the power to kill but also has the power to cast our souls into hell).
"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 "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of
knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction." Proverbs
1:7 "Hear, ye children, the instruction of a father,
and attend to know understanding." Proverbs 4:1 "My son, keep thy father's commandment, and
forsake not the law of thy mother: Bind them continually upon thine
heart, and tie them about thy neck. When thou goest, it shall lead
thee; when thou sleepest, it shall keep thee; and when thou awakest,
it shall talk with thee. For the commandment is a lamp; and the law
is light; and reproofs of instruction are the way of life: To keep
thee from the evil woman, from the flattery of the tongue of a
strange woman. Lust not after her beauty in thine heart; neither let
her take thee with her eyelids. For by means of a whorish woman a
man is brought to a piece of bread: and the adulteress will hunt for
the precious life. Can a man take fire in his bosom, and his clothes
not be burned? Can one go upon hot coals, and his feet not be
burned? So he that goeth in to his neighbour's wife; whosoever
toucheth her shall not be innocent." Proverbs 6:21-29
"Whoso loveth instruction loveth knowledge: but
he that hateth reproof is brutish." " A wise son heareth his
father's instruction: but a scorner heareth not rebuke." "The fear
of the LORD is the instruction of wisdom; and before honour is
humility." "He that wasteth his father, and chaseth away his mother,
is a son that causeth shame, and bringeth reproach. Cease, my son,
to hear the instruction that causeth to err from the words of
knowledge. An ungodly witness scorneth judgment: and the mouth of
the wicked devoureth iniquity." Proverbs 12:1; 13:1; 15:33;
19:26-28
The classroom environment, structured upon "Bloom's
Taxonomies," is one now designed by social engineers ('change'
agents, facilitators,
social-psychologists, Transformational Marxists, all the same in thought
and action, i.e. in social action, i.e. in praxis)
"to
develop attitudes and values toward learning which are not shared by the
parents," producing
"conflict and tension
between parents and children" when the children return
home with their newly discovered belief system, challenging parental
authority, conflicting with all "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) These are key components to a brainwashing
session.
Warren Bennis, an expert on the techniques of
brainwashing (washing from
the brain the system of Righteousness, which is the basis of
absolutes, the traditional family, private business, private land,
nationalism, and sovereignty, i.e. a free people, i.e. individual
liberty under God, i.e. inalienable rights)
wrote:
"In order to effect rapid change, . . .
[one]
must mount a vigorous attack on the family lest the traditions of
present generations be preserved. It is necessary, in other words,
artificially to create an experiential chasm between parents and
children—to insulate the children in order that they can more easily be
indoctrinated with new ideas. If one wishes to mold children in order to
achieve some future goal, one must begin
to view them as superior. One
must teach them not to respect their tradition-bound elders, who are tied
to the past and know only what is irrelevant." (Warren Bennis,
The Temporary Society)
Jean-Jacques Rousseau understood the dialectic nature of the
child (of sensuousness), their hatred of "Mine, not yours" of the
father (of righteousness), their contempt for the voice and the
force of higher authority, the voice that inhibits and blocks their lust
for the things of the world.
"The first man who,
having fenced in a piece of land,
said 'This is mine,' and found people
naive enough to believe him, that man
was the true founder of civil
society. From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors
and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the
stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: Beware of
listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that
the
fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody."
(Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discourse on Inequality)
As the "forbidden" tree, i.e. the fathers tree, was the woman's tree,
then the man's tree, then "Our" tree (Genesis 3:1-6), so the kings
horses are the peoples horses (Marx), so the children lusting for those
things which are not theirs to take, that being the fathers things, are
now their things through the voice of the "We" the "Us" and the "Ours."
The voice that all men have in common is the voice of the "Mine" of the
"the child within" lusting after those things which are not theirs to
take, the voice of "covetousness" now hid in the collective voice
of the "Ours." It is here, in the collective voice of the "Ours"
that the voice of the father, i.e. his "Mine, not yours," that
inalienable rights ("civil society"), the rights of the
individual (those rights which come from the father, i.e. engendering
the conscience within, protecting the children from the
"covetousness," i.e. the unrighteousness of the collective horde)
are lost. It is here in the collective voice of the "Ours, not
just yours," i.e. in "human rights," i.e. in the collective voice of the
"covetousness" of "the child within," that the the citizens are
made "merchandise" of by the "feigned" words (the plastic
words, the forked tongue, the double speak, the lies) of those skilled
in dialectic thought and action.
"And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make
merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and
their damnation slumbereth not." 2 Peter 2:3 After all
is said and done by men of dialectic thought and action, i.e. "children
of disobedience" in men's bodies, i.e. as children in tantrum with power
to kill, tare down, and destroy, thinking that all they see ("sense
perceive") is theirs to take: "the earth is the Lord’s, and the
fulness thereof." (1 Corinthians 10:26) Those of
the collective "Ours," the "child within" united in consensus, in
the praxis of evil, will be judged by the father in the end.
"Every one that is proud in heart is an
abomination to the LORD: though hand join in hand, he shall not be unpunished.
By mercy and truth iniquity is purged: and by the fear of the LORD men depart
from evil." Proverbs 16:5-6 The
solution to the voice of dialectic thought, to that voice of your "child
within," is to be found in the Lord alone, in His obedience to His
Heavenly Father, now your Heavenly Father through Him (His
righteousness imputed to you by your faith in Him), to be obey by
you as well.
"Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such
things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor
forsake thee." Hebrews 13:5
George Hegel believed that the system of
ethics is engendered from the child's nature (of sensuousness)
and not from the authority structure of the parents (which inculcates
righteousness). "The child, contrary to appearance, is the
absolute, the rationality; he is what is enduring and everlasting, the
totality." (George Hegel, System of Ethical Life)
Hegel is saying that it is in the child's sensuous and
spontaneous nature where man is to find his standards for "normal human
behavior" and not in the standards inculcated by parents, i.e. standards
of righteousness which restrain, i.e. inhibit and block, i.e.
"repress" the child's carnal nature, i.e. "alienating" man from
that which he has in common to all mankind, i.e. his sinful, worldly nature.
Karl Marx believed that for man to be truly himself, his
world must become a place of sin, i.e. a world of augmented
sensuousness achieved by the attenuation of pain, i.e. by the
"categorical imperative" of annihilation, i.e. the
annihilation of the system of
Righteousness, if righteousness was to be no longer an
issue of life. Marx
believed that the traditional family system had to be "annihilated"
if belief in God (and therefore the issue of sin, righteousness,
and judgment) was to become a thing of the past, not only in the persons
thoughts but also in his social actions.
"Once the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the
holy family, the former must itself be annihilated
[vernichtet]
theoretically and practically." (Karl Marx, Theses On Feuerbach #4)
The identity of man, according to Marx, i.e. according to dialectic
thought, is not to find in God (in His righteousness) but in man,
i.e. in his carnal nature (in his sensuousness) alone.
Sigmund Freud believed that without the "killing and eating" of the
father figure (the praxis of patricide) the true nature of man, engendered through the
child's nature (the praxis of incest―sensuousness
unrestrained by "non-sensuous" rules), could never be realized. He believed that
the father could "stick around" as long as he no longer functioned as a
traditional father figure, thus tolerating or participating in the
praxis of incest (consensus).
"‘It is not really a
decisive matter whether one has killed one’s father or abstained
from the deed,' if the function of the conflict and its consequences
are the same." (Sigmund Freud in Herbert Marcuse, Eros and
Civilization:
A philosophical inquiry into Freud)
Freud believed that man could only be himself again, i.e. carnal, void of
'guilty' feelings engendered by the preaching and teaching of sin,
righteousness, and judgment―condemnation for sin, i.e. judged as
evil for his "normal human behavior" (for his "polymorphously
perverse behavior") only if man was freed from the the effects of
the traditional father figure, i.e. his commands and his chastening or
threat of chastening inhibiting the child (and therefore man)
from being himself.
Benjamin Bloom, along with David Krathwohl (the lead author), in the
Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Book II Affective Domain (used
by every certified teacher in this nation) reference two men who reflect
their "weltanschauung," i.e. their world view or paradigm.
They are Theodor Adorno and Erik Fromm.
Adorno, in his book The
Authoritarian Personality, wrote: "... the conception of the ideal
family situation for the child [consists of]: (1) uncritical obedience to the
father and elders, (2) pressures directed unilaterally from above to
below, (3) inhibition of spontaneity and (4) emphasis on conformity to
externally imposed values." "God is conceived more directly
after a parental image and thus as a source of support and as a
guiding and sometimes punishing authority." "The power‑relationship between the parents, the
domination of the subject's family by the father or by the
mother, and their relative dominance in specific areas of life
also seemed of importance for our problem."
Fromm, in his book Escape From Freedom, wrote: “Every
neurosis is an example of dynamic adaptation; it is essentially an
adaptation to such external conditions as are in themselves irrational
and, generally speaking, unfavorable to the growth of the child.”
Adorno, in another work, Introduction to Society, elaborated upon
Fromm's understanding of the traditional family as being
"irrational." He wrote: "... the survival of irrational
'moments' of society can only survive through irrational institutions
like the family." "... the irrational conditions of society can
only be maintained through the survival of [the] irrational
functions of the family." (Theodor Adorno,
Introduction to Sociology)
All of
social-psychology, whether united or separated into their individual
fields, are focused upon one thing, the negation of the
traditional family structure, the negation of the top-down system
of Righteousness, and the negation of righteousness
itself (Jesus obeying his Father's will, even to death, asking us to do
the same―John
5:30, John 12:49, Matthew 12:50, Philippians 2:5-8, Matthew 23:9). "External domination," while claimed by those of the
"new" world order to be the enemy of humanity, the source of
"repression" (according to Freud) and "alienation" (according to Marx), is itself the only tool
whereby the "new" world order can initiate and sustain "order." Once the
dialectic process has "control" over the souls of men, no one can
challenge its authority―a condition known as a "police state," i.e.
with the
"children of disobedience" oppressing the people and women
ruling over them (Isaiah
3:4-5, 12).
Lest you get lost in all this, thinking that it is just some
weird academic exercise devised by some "heady" people of "intellectual"
abilities playing around in some secret laboratory in some far off land, you
need to realize that the mindset of those who have merged Marx and Freud
(social-psychology), which now has unlimited "control" over the thoughts
and actions of the people of this nation (and not just the leadership)
have done all this for spiritual reasons. Fromm wrote:
"In
the process of history man gives birth to himself. He becomes what he
potentially is, and he attains what the serpent―the
symbol of wisdom and rebellion―promised, and
what the patriarchal, jealous God of Adam did not wish: that man would become
like God himself."
(Erick Fromm,
You shall
be as gods; whose book Escape From Freedom was the weltanschauung,
i.e. the world view, i.e. the paradigm for Bloom and his taxonomy of
education objectives,.) Herbart Marcuse, another partner with
Adorno and Fromm (all Transformational Marxists of the "Frankfurt
School") wrote: "If the guilt accumulated in the civilized domination
of man by man can ever be redeemed by freedom [freedom from a
patriarchal based family and therefore from a patriarchal God who
initiates and sustains it],
then the ‘original sin’
must be committed again: ‘We must again eat from the tree of knowledge
in order to fall back into the state of innocence.” (Herbart Marcuse,
Eros and Civilization: A philosophical inquiry into Freud) Norman Brown (a compatriot with Marcuse) wrote: regarding Freud and the
merging of him with Marx: "It is a shattering
experience for anyone seriously committed to the Western traditions of
morality and rationality to take a steadfast, unflinching look at what
Freud has to say. To experience
Freud is to partake a second time of the forbidden fruit;" "I
wagered my intellectual life on the idea of finding in Freud what was
missing in Marx." (Norman O. Brown commenting about his book, Life Against Death)
Mike Connor wrote, regarding Brown's book: "Life Against Death established Brown, along with his
colleague and friend Herbert Marcuse, and later Charles Reich, as an
intellectual leader of the New Left …. a Marxist mode of Freudian
analysis. Brown's push to resurrect the human body with all its
erotic urges freely expressed, resonated with the members of the
Human Potential Movement and the undergrads they were influencing in
the 60's." (Mike Connor,
quoted in March 23-30, 2005 issue of Metro Santa Cruz)
It is here, in the praxis of
Genesis 3:1-6,
i.e. the praxis of dialectic 'reasoning,' that we find the
'drive' and the 'purpose' of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. the "salvation"
of mankind from the righteousness of God, that we find the
ideology that man can be himself alone, of his own carnal nature alone,
i.e. in, of, and for the world alone, i.e. "controlled" by "prince of
the power of the air," i.e. by Satan alone.
The retraining of educators upon a "new" classroom curriculum
(merging Freud, psychology and Marx, sociology into social-psychology
and applying it in the classroom) was therefore the best rough to take in the restructuring of America for
the 'purpose' of the "new" world order, which is not "new." Read
Genesis 3:1-6, i.e. it is that "new."
"Re-education must
be clever enough in manipulating the subjects to have them think that
they are running the show." "The objective sought will not be reached so
long as the new set of values is not experienced by the individual as
something freely chosen." "An outright enforcement of the new set of
values and beliefs is simply the introduction of a new god who has to
fight with the old god, now regarded as a devil."
"The individual
accepts the new system of values and beliefs by accepting belongingness
to a group." "A feeling of complete freedom and a heightened group
identification are frequently more important at a particular stage of
re-education than learning not to break specific rules." (Kurt Lewin
quoted in Kenneth Benne,
Human Relations in Curriculum Change,
pdf file format)
Carl Rogers knew that human nature (of the system of
sensuousness), that which is of the many below, i.e. of
sensuousness ("I'm OK, You're OK," "equality" paradigm), would prevail over
Godly or parental authority (of the
system of Righteousness), that which is of the one or few
above, i.e. of righteousness (obey or be chastened, top-down
paradigm), providing the right environment for
experimentation ('discovering' oneself in the many) was initiated and sustained.
The deception being, the many were simply now made the subject of the
few or the one, i.e. the social engineers ('change agents,' 'vanguard
party,' directorate, facilitators, councilors, etc) and the Antichrist
(the Lord of the Ring of unrighteous men). The counseling
session and the public classroom were the perfect laboratory from which
the 'change' was to be made. "We can choose to use our growing knowledge to
enslave people in ways never dreamed of before, depersonalizing them,
controlling them by means so carefully selected that they will perhaps
never be aware of their loss of personhood." "We
can achieve a sort of control under which the controlled, though they
are following a code much more scrupulously than was ever the case under
the old system, nevertheless feel
free." "By
a careful design, we control not the final behavior, but the inclination
to behavior―the motives, the desires, the wishes. The
curious thing is that in that case the question of
freedom never arises."
"If
we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions,
the predicted behaviors will follow."
(Carl Rogers On Becoming A Person)
Abraham Maslow knew that without
the liberation of sensuousness (equality), righteousness
(top-down) could not be
negated and men like him (perverts) could not have free reign
of (pleasures of and control over) the children of the parents (as well as
control over their businesses, property, and $$$―taking and "enjoying"
for themselves that which is not theirs to take or have).
"So it
looks as if nudism is the first step toward ultimate
fee-animality-humanness. It's the easiest to take. Must
encourage it." "Yet nakedness is absolutely
right. So
is the attack on antieroticism, the Christian & Jewish foundations.
Must
move in the direction of the Reichian orgasm." "This movement
can be dignified and
Apollonian & can avoid pornography & neurosis & ugliness. I
must put as much of this as is possible & usable in my education book, &
more & more in succeeding writings." [Then his children's
behavior (as he saw his family fall apart due to dialectic ideology and
practices) began to bother him.]
"... my children got
me into conflict with my
theory." “I’ve been in continuous
conflict over this Esalen-type, orgiastic, Dionysian-type education.” "Who should teach whom?"
(Abraham Maslow, The Journals of Abraham Maslow)
Like
a pharmaceutical company, which knows that it's money making product is
lethal, (burying the truth in mountains of data and laboratory research,
claiming that the "problem" is from some other, as yet
unidentifiable, source)
those of dialectic 'reasoning', know that it's money making (people
controlling) process is
evil, i.e. is "Pandora's Box," yet continue putting the process into praxis upon the
citizens of this nation, claiming to all its clients or "unites," i.e. victims, that
it will help them to attain a "better" standard of living not
only for themselves but for all "the people" (as in the "the people's
republic of Communist Americas"), i.e. praxis
the art craft of "the old man," lying, i.e. worshiping the creation
(that which is apart from he who is righteous, worshiping only
that which is of
sensuousness and subject to death, i.e. the source of all things
that "seem to be 'good'") rather than the creator (who is
righteous, who is the source of life, i.e. the source of all things
good). By coming between the creator and the created, i.e. between
God and man, the father and his children, the teacher and his students,
the business owner and his employee, the land owner and his land, the
citizen and his representative, etc., they take that which is not theirs
to take, i.e. man, the children, the students, the employee, the land,
the representative, etc. and turn them against God, the father, the
teacher, the business owner, the land owner, the citizen, etc, and
profit themselves from their praxis of usurpation thereof. "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are
clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal
power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when
they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became
vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory
of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to
birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave
them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their
own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and
worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for
ever. Amen." Romans 1:20-25
If you understand this, you
understand what the dialectic process is all about, i.e. the negation
of righteousness as the issue of life by placing abomination,
i.e. that which is "highly esteemed amongst men," i.e. the
sensuousness of the pleasures of this life, in its place. No
class on Hegel, Marx, Freud, Rogers, Maslow, etc. will tell you the
truth, i.e. what the dialectic process is all about. Not until you turn to
the word of God can you see the dialectic process for what it is. All the
following articles expose the dialectic process by the light of God's
word. Otherwise you can not see the dialectic process for what it
is, you
'justifying' yourself before men, "highly esteeming the
approval of men" for the augmentation of the pleasures and the
attenuation of the pain (including the chastening by God) of this life―Abomination. It is why we are what we are
as a nation today, a nation of unrighteousness (sin), promoting
unrighteousness (the way of sin, i.e. the dialectic process) around the world.
Now we are hated and mocked by the other nations
of the world―who once looked up to us as an example of how it should be
done.
"Righteousness
exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people."
Proverbs 13:24
If you think we, as a nation, can come out of this, just
consider this. No candidate (conservative and, of course, liberal)
can speak of righteousness today (or does) for fear of loosing votes
(if they mention the Word of God it is for deceitful purposes only, so
that they can "impress" a select few, deceivable, voters).
Who would listen? Any man who would run on a platform of
righteousness would not be voted for because he is
"unwinnable." Certainly the American public would not vote for
him, especially
those of the "humanized" (dialectic) churches. The problem is not the candidates who are running,
it is the citizens (especially the churches) themselves, i.e. it is you
(and me) "leaning to our own understanding" (leaning upon our own and
others "feelings" and "thoughts," trusting in our own sensuousness)
and not "trusting in the Lord with all our heart" (not trusting in Him
and His righteousness, not living by "every word which proceeds
from the mouth of God," not walking in the Spirit). Proverbs 3:5
(paraphrased) We are to repent of our sins before the Lord, suffer the
shaming (rejection) by the world, along with Christ, and endure the testing of
our faith
to the end. For it is in Christ alone that we are on the right way, know
the truth, and have everlasting life. All other ways lead to death
(damnation), and many are going that way. "There is a way which
seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof [are] the ways of
death." Proverbs 14:12 As far as this nation goes,
there is no such thing as a Christian nation, only a nation with
Christians, i.e. those who humble themselves before God and seek his
face, crying out for him for help in time of need. It is now need,
"felt" need, i.e. "lusts" which men cry out for, even doing so in the
name of the Lord. "For the
time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but
after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having
itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth,
and shall be turned unto fables." 2 Timothy 4:3, 4
"I call heaven and earth
to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and
death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and
thy seed may live: That thou mayest love the LORD thy God, and that thou
mayest obey his voice, and that thou mayest cleave unto him: for he is
thy life, and the length of thy days: that thou mayest dwell in the land
which the LORD sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to
Jacob, to give them." Deuteronomy 30:19, 20
What was
true for the children of Israel (regarding the promised land across the
Jordon) is likewise true for you and me (regarding the promised land―not of this creation, who's builder and maker is God Himself),
by faith in Him alone, i.e. by His righteousness alone, are we
able to enter in his kingdom. "Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me,
let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For
whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his
life for my sake shall find it. For what is a man profited, if he shall
gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in
exchange for his soul?" Matthew 16:24-26
"For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the
Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come in his own glory, and in his
Father's, and of the holy angels." Luke 9:26
While the world, through dialectic 'reasoning,' tries to
convince you that academics, work, religion, government, etc. is of this
world, i.e. of sensuousness alone, be assured that all will be
judged according to God's righteousness. Don't let the Midianitish women seduce, deceive, and
manipulate you with that which is of your nature, of our
sensuousness and draw you way from the truth and the life which
can only be found in Christ Jesus, in His righteousness alone,
i.e. in His grace alone, in his Word alone, in your faith in Him alone,
i.e. in Him alone. Hollowed be our Heavenly Father, who's Kingdom,
Power, and Glory is of and for Him alone (those of faith in Him being
adopted as sons into His Kingdom, by His Power, to behold His Glory for
eternity―Ephesians 1-6). Let us reject the word of man and turn
instead to God and His Word for direction. It is only in Him alone
that we can know the way, know the truth, and know eternal life.
Introduction to Articles
by Dean Gotcher
(Revised January 12, 2012)
"And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God." Luke 16: 15
I get
so excited knowing the truth. And just as excited when sharing it.
Thinking that Christians would be just as excited as me when I share it
at meetings or call them
or they call me to have a meeting, I have learned (after years of speaking across this
nation―some 15+ years and 4000+ presentations in 46 states) it is
Christians, "enlightened Christians" that is, who are most
distraught with what I share. Being more concerned about "the approval
of men" ("so that they can 'feel' good or 'feel' better about themselves"―where 'right'
or 'good' is based upon their own sensuousness, i.e. pleasure or
pain, i.e. approval or disapproval)
than "the approval of the Lord" (where 'right' or 'good'
is based upon His own righteousness), they either want me to 'change' my presentation
(so that it will not interfere with
their relationship with others, i.e. "so that they can be less
offensive to others," i.e. so that the truth will not offend anyone,
including themselves, i.e. it will not
interfere with the "respect" they need from others, i.e. not
cost them "support" for their 'cause,' i.e. not "run off" those not of
the faith they "need" in order to defend themselves from the world
system―some hosts reporting in the past that after my
presentation "all hell broke loose," the "hell" coming especially from
"enlightened Christians"―that should take care of most "rational,"
i.e.
enlightened people asking me to come and share the truth with
them, their family, their friends, and their community) or not share
it at all
( saying
"People won't understand what I am saying," even though
they do).
Liberals should feel safe knowing that only a few people will bother to
read this kind of material. Most people 'will' to remain ignorant of
how liberals, disguised as "conservatives," are seducing, deceiving, and manipulating
them, thinking that "ignorance is bliss." The "Christian
conservative"
won't read it because it is to "secular" ("academic," i.e.
"intellectual," i.e.
"To hard to understand") and the liberal (together with the
enlightened
Christian) won't read it because it is to "religious" ("irrational,"
i.e. "scriptural," already knowing that it is "not worth knowing").
Until people become aware that they have a disease, they
don't tend to study it with the hope of overcoming it and living longer.
Man has replaced, as the focus of life, spiritual "disease" (man's separation
from God―an issue of eternity, i.e. an issue of righteousness, i.e.
where sin is the estrangement-alienation between God and man, i.e.
caused by man's love of sensuousness, i.e. "lusting" after the
things of this world, i.e. of the flesh, of man only) with temporal disease (man's
separation from the "enjoyments" of
this life―an issue of the temporary, i.e. an issue of sensuousness,
i.e. where sin is estrangement-alienation of man from man, where sin is
therefore caused by man's love of righteousness, i.e. sin is
therefore man's affection
for the things not of this world, i.e. for those thing which are of the spirit of God
only, which
causes "dissention, division, and divisiveness," causing
"repression, estrangement, and alienation" among men―"God is the anthropological source of alienation."
Stephen Eric Bronner, Of
Critical Theory and Its Theorists; "'Sin' is the
estrangement of man from man." Leonard F. Wheat,
Paul Tillich’s Dialectical Humanism: Unmasking the God above God; "If Freud’s
hypothesis is not corroborated by any anthropological evidence ["the
domination of man by man" being the source of "neurosis"―a
deep relation to physical and emotional events of the past, rules
inculcated by parents, etc. which prevent
relating with the events of the present, i.e. inculcated rules of the
past inhibiting adaptability to 'change' to fit in with the present―which
would be true in that parents and other authorities, being of flesh,
pass away but God, being Spirit, does not, being everlasting He is
therefore ever present watching over us on how we respond to the
commands he gave us yesterday, gives us today, and will give us
tomorrow, all according to and in agreement with His everlasting Will], it would have to be discarded
altogether ... except for the fact that it telescopes, in a
sequence of catastrophic events, the historical dialectic of domination
... elicits aspects of civilization hitherto unexplained [by
rejecting God, replacing Him with a Gnostic story, secularized by Hegel,
Marx, and Freud, i.e. man "dominated" by God, above human nature, i.e.
preventing the spirit of oneness seeking itself out of the many, i.e.
the many "divine sparks" ("The dialectical method was overthrown―the
parts were prevented from finding their definition within the whole." Georg Lukacs, History & Class
Consciousness What is Orthodox Marxism?), is
replaced by the spirit of man itself being dominated by an abnormal,
"irrational" Spirit of God of man's own making, created by "abnormal"
man for the purpose of initiating and sustaining domination over other
men―the source of such thinking, which is found all around the world in
all men, i.e. God above man, is left unexplained by Hegel, Marx, Freud,
etc. other than to label it as the source of "neurosis," the source of
belief-action dichotomy, the source of antithesis]." "... the
Freudian hypothesis ... does not lead back to the image of a paradise
which man has forfeited by his sin against God," [it leads]
"to the domination of man by man [in this way the issue of
"sin" is negated from human thought and action, i.e. the real
'purpose' for 'reasoning' dialectically]." Herbart Marcuse,
Eros and Civilization: A philosophical inquiry into Freud "In Eclipse of Reason Horkheimer ─ ‘this mentality
of man as the master can be traced back to the first chapters of Genesis.’"
Martin Jay, The Dialectic Imagination "Freud,
Hegel, and Nietzsche are, like Marx, compelled to postulate external
domination and its assertion by force in order to explain repression."
"The abolition of repression would only threaten patriarchal
domination [faith, belief, obedience in higher authority, God
being the highest authority, as well as the acceptance of the use of
chastening to initiate and sustain that top-down order]." Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death:
The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)
Why eternal life (righteousness)
does not seem to be important today is that life in the "here-and-now"
(carnal "enjoyment," sensuousness, "the approval of men") seems
to be what is most important, even for the Christian. Sin
and repentance (concern about eternity, i.e. living it in the present by
faith, where reason is subject to
righteousness, i.e. subject to what God says, i.e. the reason you
are doing what you are doing is because "the Lord said to") has become moot in the
"light" of social needs (concern for the "contemporary," where 'reasoning'
is subject to sensuousness, i.e. subject to how man feels and
what he thinks in the 'moment',' i.e. the reason you are doing what you
are doing is because "it feels like, i.e. 'seems to be,' the 'right' thing to do" in the
situation, i.e. in the 'moment'). What has happened to this nation,
manifested in sensuousness―abomination, is the result of righteousness,
the rejection of it as being the issue of life, with "enjoyment," i.e.
pleasure and sensuous 'reasoning' ('reasoning' sensuously―"the
imagination of the heart"), i.e. self-social 'justification,'
social issues having taken its place.
While with righteousness there is no
tolerance (there is only forgiveness for those who repent of and turn
from their sensuous ways) with sensuousness there must be
tolerance (there is only tolerance for those who repent of and turn from
the way of righteousness). While righteousness
(forgiveness) can only be imputed by Christ to those of faith in
Him (and known and revealed by those who walk in the Holy Spirit)
sensuousness (humanity) can only be "purified" by men who "lean upon
their own understanding" (who walk in their own carnal nature,
building "common ground" upon only that
which is common to all men, united in the spirit of brotherhood,
in community, i.e. in common-unity, united in the love of Eros, in the "enjoyment,"
i.e. in the pleasures of this life in consensus―call it agape or
any other name all you want, it is still Eros―the fruit bears witness to
which spirit it is, i.e. whether it is of God, of righteousness,
or of man, of sensuousness, i.e. I don't see Christians running
to the Word of God for answers today,
if it is the Word of God, but rather to the opinions of men).
Without the word of God, there is
no righteousness. All there is is a world of men seeking to
attain it (righteousness) through their own sensuousness. Where
there is confusion (seeking to unite sensuousness and
righteousness) there is only uncertainty. The "contemporary"
Christian (the dialectic Christian) being uncertain of the word of God
(being full of men's opinions) is full of confusion. The
"contemporary" church (the dialectic church), full of men trying to fuse
righteousness (God's word) with sensuousness (men's
opinions) and sensuousness (men's opinions) with righteousness
(God's word) is therefore 'driven' by the way's of the world ('driven'
by sensuousness). 'Purposed' in finding oneness with both the
world and with God ('purposed' in sensuousness), deceiving itself
and those who come to it for answers, i.e. that it knows the truth when
in fact it follows after its own sensuous lies, it, like wolves
in sheep skin, draws all who would come to it for the truth, i.e. escape
God's judgment upon them for lusting after sensuousness, back
into the world of sensuousness, now calling it 'righteousness.'
Of the many who entered the wilderness only two entered the promised
land, the many not entering because of their lusting after
sensuousness (not having faith in, not believing upon, and not
obeying God and His word, being lead instead by men's opinions, i.e.
'driven' by the "approval of men,"―the only reason for polls, surveys,
feasibility studies, etc.―'purposed' in achieving it, i.e. unity and
oneness in consensus, i.e. in that which is of sensuousness),
the two entering because they sought after righteousness (men of
faith in, belief upon, and obedience to God and His word alone, i.e.
following after God and His word alone).
God has called all men to reason from faith (righteousness),
i.e. to repent of their sins before Him,
rather than to 'reason' through sight (sensuousness), i.e.
'justify' themselves before men.
Through sensuousness man can only understand life from (through)
his own carnal nature. Therefore, despite his ever learning, he
can never come to the knowledge of the truth. Having sensuous eyes he cannot see spiritual truth and having sensuous ears he cannot hear spiritual
truth, his eyes and ears filtering
righteousness, that which is of God, through his own sensuousness,
through that which is of his own nature, blinding him to the truth of
his sinfulness, i.e. his wickedness before a holy, righteous, and
pure God. Without the fear of chastening (or the fear of the
"wrath of God," the fear of judgment for sin, i.e. for disobedience),
the commands which chastening (or wrath) enforce, i.e. that which is
spiritual (that which is not of and therefore not understandable of the
sensual 'moment'), i.e. that which is righteous (according
to He who is above the sensual 'moment,' be it God or parent) is
sensually perceived as being 'irrelevant.' Commands are
sense perceived as being 'irrational' when they inhibit or block
(create conflict with) the pleasures ("enjoyment," i.e. that which is
sense perceived as being 'good') in and of this life, i.e. inhibit
man finding unity (oneness) with the world (through the flesh),
especially when man's sense perception is that in the sensual
action (praxis) "no one will be hurt," i.e. all participations are
consenting to (in agreement with) the action (praxis) which is
sensually perceived as being 'good,' i.e. the praxis is
engendered through consensus, i.e. with sensuousness.
Therefore when it comes to the "body of death," i.e. the law
of sin, i.e. the law of the flesh, i.e. that which is of sensuousness,
i.e. of the world, the commands of God, that which is of His
righteousness, i.e. His word, i.e. not of this world is sensually
perceived as being not only 'irrational' (God and parent's commands are
out of step with the 'time') but also 'irrelevant' (the use of
chastening or fear of chastening, to enforce their commands, i.e. their
authority system must be
negated) in a world of 'change,' i.e. of sensuousness, i.e.
of the flesh.
According to dialectic 'reasoning,' that which is good,
i.e. that which is only of God, i.e. of righteousness is
sense perceived as being evil when it inhibits or blocks man's sensuousness
(punishes him for his desire for pleasure, his desire for 'change') and that which is evil, i.e. that which is
only of his nature, i.e. of sensuousness is perceived as
being good when it augments pleasure, when it engenders 'change.' Because of his sensuous
nature (ever in flux, i.e. "I 'reason' therefore I am," i.e. I
am ever
'changing' in a 'changing' world), no matter how much man might seek to please God (who is
eternally established, i.e. "I Am that I Am," never 'changing,'
i.e. "no shadow of turning"), he can not.
'Change' can not take place in an environment of preaching and
teaching, where commands are enforced through chastening, without
the direct use of counter-force against it. But in an environment
of dialoguing opinions, 'change,' that is 'change' of paradigm,
is instantly achieved. Righteousness is instantly
negated in an environment of sensuous 'reasoning,' i.e.
an environment of men seeking to achieve consensus.
It is in the environment of sensuousness that man finds his nature
and nature 'driving' him in the 'purpose' of actualizing oneness (peace
and pleasure) with himself and the world. It is here, in the
environment of sensuousness (of 'change'), that the dialectic
process finds its 'purpose,' i.e. the negation of
righteousness ('rationally' negating that which is not of
sensuous man, i.e. of the world).
Therefore man, in
dialectic fashion (choosing himself, i.e. his feelings, i.e.
unrighteousness, i.e. sensuousness as the standard
for knowing truth), chooses the broad pathway of 'change,' i.e. the
pathway of unrighteousness, i.e. the way of sin (the laws of the flesh). "Πáντα
pεî
καî
οúδèν
μéνει
"Everything flows, nothing stands still."
(Heraclitus) "What truly is always true is that all is
in flux, the truth-seeker ought properly to address himself to the study
of this life process of truth seeking itself." (G. W. F. Hegel)
"Individuals move not from a fixity through change to a new fixity,
though such a process is indeed possible. But [through a]
continuum from fixity to changingness, from rigid structure to flow,
from stasis to process." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A
Therapist View of Psychotherapy) It is
sensuousness which carnal man readily identifies, is drawn towards,
and relates with, not righteousness.
"The objective sought
[uniting in sensuousness and negating righteousness]
will not be reached so long as the new set of values is not
experienced by the individual as something freely chosen." "An
outright enforcement of the new set of values and beliefs is simply the
introduction of a new god who has to fight with the old god, now
regarded as a devil." (Kurt Lewin and Paul Grabbe,
"Conduct, Knowledge, and Acceptance of
New Values" The Journal of Social Issues, 1:3:56-65 August, 1945)
Truth, according to dialectic 'reasoning,' is found in
"sense experience" (through
sensuousness) rather than in established laws and commands (in
righteousness). 'Truth' must therefore be 'changeable' (must
be 'rationally' relevant to the 'moment,' i.e. make 'sense' in the
'light' of the current situation, i.e. be only of nature) or it
is not real. (According to Marx, reality, the "absolute
subject," can only come out of the "ether of the brain." Karl
Marx, the Holy Family) According to dialectic 'reasoning,'
truth which is 'irrational' (not sensual, not carnal, not
natural) is 'irrelevant' to the "big picture." The dialectic fear is, if
righteousness is given power to rule over the affairs of man it
will inhibit or block man's 'quest' to initiate and sustain social
harmony and world peace ("self-actualize" unity in social praxis).
Therefore righteousness must be negated, not only in the
thoughts of man but also in his social actions, if man is to know
himself as he really is, i.e. carnal, i.e. natural, i.e. only of
the world, i.e. working for a "new" world order, where only he
(collectively) is god. This is the only 'truth' which can be
known, i.e. be acceptable to man, according to dialectic 'reasoning.'
The truth is, it is only in righteousness, that which is only
found in Christ (imputed by Him to men of faith in Him) that man
can know the truth, i.e. know who he is, where he came from, and where
he is going. Apart from the truth which is in Christ (Christ is
the truth) all that man has is his ability to 'justify' himself, i.e.
'justify' his carnal nature, i.e. 'justify' his lust for the things of
this world, using his 'reasoning' abilities to glorify himself, glorify
that which is created, rather than, through faith, glorifying God who
created all things. Man's heart being wicked
(unregenerate), can only engender a world of wickedness (sustain a
world of unrighteousness and lies).
Carnal man, in and of himself, can not comprehend
(understand) that which is Spiritual, that which is of God, that which
is of righteousness, i.e. 'unchanging,' holy, sacred, pure,
perfect, good. His carnal nature, that which is of the world, of
the earth, can only comprehend that which is temporal, that which is of
sensuousness, that which is of unrighteousness, i.e. 'changing,'
secular, impure, imperfect, perverse. Spiritual, according to man's
carnal nature and his 'reasoning' to justify it, can only be that
force which unites (draws) man to nature itself, i.e. 'drives' him to be
at one with himself and nature in a condition of peace, i.e. guaranteed
sustenance (bread) and leisure ("enjoyment" or pleasure). Without
God revealing himself, i.e. his love, mercy, and grace, through His
word, through His only begotten son Jesus Christ, man can not know of
God's true nature, i.e. of His love, mercy, and grace. Without the
Holy Spirit, man can not know God's true nature, i.e. His love,
mercy, and grace ('"joy unspeakable" and peace that "transcends
understanding") whereby he is able to endure the tribulations which
comes from the world against him, i.e. against righteousness.
It is only in the righteousness of Christ, imputed to men
of faith in Him, that the nature of God is manifested in the hearts,
minds, and actions of a man. While man can know of
God (know there is a god), recognizing the order of creation, they can
not know Him, apart from his revealed word, i.e. in Christ and
His Holy Spirit.
Man, in rejecting God's judgment upon him for
his sin, i.e. for his disobedience to His command to obey or else (to
break one of the the laws is to break them all, i.e. its not the law
itself which is the only issue, it is obedience to the paradigm of
perfection, purity, holiness, righteousness) is therefore subject
to only his sensuousness, that which is of the world, of nature,
and of his 'reasoning' abilities to 'justify' it. By
perceiving himself as being the same as the rest of nature, subject to
laws of nature only, he can only revert to dialectic
'reasoning,' i.e. 'reasoning' through dialogue, through speculation and
experimentation to come to know himself and the world he finds himself
in. In this praxis of dialectic 'reasoning' he negates
(blinds himself to) the creator of the world and His righteousness.
Not being able to endure the pain of rejection which the
world bestows upon those who seek after righteousness (being
derided, rejected, persecuted, etc. for living by faith), man turns
to his carnal nature and 'reasoning' abilities to 'justify' himself
(thinking and acting according to sight, i.e. according to his own
sensuousness). Without God
revealing Himself to man, all man can do is believe that there is a God
(someone or something created nature and the laws of nature), acknowledge
his own failure in obeying him (in some way, shape, or form seek to
appease God for the pain he is suffering), and try,
through his works and 'reasoning' abilities, to redeem himself from
God's wrath upon him (his actions still based upon his own
sensuousness and 'reasoning' abilities). While a man
might seek after righteousness, without the righteousness
of Christ, he can not know God. He will always set out to
make a kingdom of 'righteousness' on the earth of his own, creating a kingdom
on the earth according to his own perception of 'righteousness,' i.e. subject to his
own sensuousness, i.e. to augment pleasure and attenuate pain
(so as to control the environment, i.e. the world, for the "betterment"
of life for all (at least for the "We working for us."), suppressing and
removing the 'unrighteous,' i.e. those "not of us," by force of
government when necessary―while believers are freed from the ways of the
world, in Christ, they are still subject to civil ordinances and are to
respect and obey government, up to where it goes counter to God's will,
i.e. the gospel calls no man to overthrow government for the kingdom of
God, i.e. the Lord himself will do that in His coming, it calls the
redeemed to be a witness of "God's will being done on earth" by men of
faith in Him alone). Whether in sacred or secular form
this has always been of the praxis of unredeemed man (unredeemed
by the blood of the Lamb of God), i.e. making kingdoms for his
God, according to his own carnal nature ('justifying' himself by doing
so), even doing it in
"the name of the Lord" (possessed by the 'good works' they
have done or are doing for the Lord―the gospel carries no such
mandate). In his effort to escape the
tribulations of this life, to avoid pain and approach pleasure (living
according to his own sensuousness), man is not willing to endure the pain
of daily dying to his own nature (dying to the temporal, rejecting
unrighteous and the approval of the world) and taking on the nature of God (walking in the spirit,
following after Christ, living in His righteousness―believers are not
self-righteous, i.e. their righteousness being only of
Christ, the son of God seated at the right hand of the Heavenly Father, it is those of the world who are self-righteous,
'righteous' according to their own carnal nature). The witness of God to the world has always
been the witness
(martyrdom, i.e. rejection by the world) of those seeking after
righteousness (that righteousness which can only come from
God). The world, loving the pleasures of this life
(darkness) rather than the righteousness of God (light), can do
nothing else but persecute the righteous for their own sake, i.e.
for the sake of their own sensuousness, i.e. for the sensation
of "social harmony" and "world peace," "sense experienced" in the
praxis of consensus (an environment in which the righteous
can not, without causing "division," "dissention," and "disharmony,"
i.e. causing pain in the world and receiving pain from the world,
participate).
While good and evil, according to dialectic
'reasoning,' can only be 'discovered' through man's sensuous
nature, i.e. with his natural desire to augment pleasure and attenuate
pain (that which is natural), good and evil, according to
God's will, is based upon what He is, i.e. according to his 'nature,'
i.e. righteousness (that which is super-natural, i.e. not of
nature). Deception comes when man bases good upon (seeks to achieve good through)
his own carnal nature. His 'reasoning' is therefore used to
'justify' himself, his sensuous thoughts and actions as being
good ('righteous' in his own eyes) when in fact they are evil.
It is on this ground, i.e. that man is basically good or has the potentially
of becoming good, that philosophy takes its stand. That man
can become 'good' ('righteous'), given the 'right' conditions,
the 'right' education, doing the 'right' actions, negates (in the
thoughts and actions of men) the necessity of righteousness being
imputed by God to men of faith in Him.
Enlightened Christians ("contemporary
Christians") follow the same train of
thought that Stephen Bronner describes in his book on Marxism: "The
ideas of the Enlightenment taught man that he could trust his own reason
[engendered from emotions or sensation] as a guide to establishing valid ethical norms and that he could rely on
himself [his carnal nature and his 'reasoning' abilities in
'justifying' himself], needing neither revelation [the scriptures,
i.e. the word of the Lord] nor that authority of the church [the Lord Himself]
in order to know good and evil." (Stephen Eric Bronner, Of
Critical Theory and Its Theorists) bracketed
information added Enlightened people are not 'rational'
(as they would like you to believe), they are emotional (what
they accuse you of being). Pin then
down with the truth and they become emotional, i.e. hateful
toward you, disparaging you, labeling you as being 'irrational' (in
'denial') or
uncaring,
treating the truth you share (and thus you) as being 'irrelevant' (of no
worth). As
disappointing as this might be, i.e. "Christians" choosing sensuousness
over righteousness, choosing self-social 'justification' over
justification in Christ, choosing human feelings and 'reasoning' (men's
opinions, theories, etc.) over faith in God and belief in
His Word, choosing sensual knowledge over revelation knowledge, choosing man's will over God's will,
choosing to fear man rather than God, choosing Caesar over Christ,
aut Caesar aut nullus, "either Caesar or nobody"
(Caesar provided circuses, "entertainment," "celebration,"
and sensuousness, Christ a cross, "suffering,"
"shame," and righteousness), choosing to put their trust in man, in his flesh and his
'wisdom,' rather than in the Lord (Proverbs 3:5, 6), choosing the
creation over the creator, choosing the pleasures of this life over God, etc., I am not discouraged
(at least I don't stay disconsolate or crestfallen for too long). It is
God, the Lord,
the scriptures, the
truth, and His righteousness (His peace), after all, that is enduring.
"Be careful for nothing
(Gr. be anxious for nobody); but in
every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests
be made known unto God. And the peace of God, which passeth all
understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus." Philippians 4:6-7
information added We are to have
(put on)
the mind of Christ instead of the mind of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e.
the
sensuous, "self 'justifying'" mind of man. As you will come to understand, it is
(of all things) righteousness which is at the heart of the
dialectic process, i.e. why the enlightened Christian has
rejected it and the average "Christian" does not properly understand it
(or does not want to understand it). If you want to get
along with the world you can not let righteousness "tag along."
If you try to bring the two together, to have the "best" of both worlds,
i.e. the world of sensuousness (flesh) and the other world of righteousness
(Spirit),
it just 'ain't gonna' happen, no matter how hard you try.
(2 Corinthians
6:14-18;
Matthew 6:24;
Isaiah 55:8-9; Galatians 5:16-26)
Continued ....
If you want to know our schedule, schedule a meeting, or order material, or you have any questions or want to respond to the articles below, email me: deangotcher@gmail.com or write me: Dean Gotcher, Box 233, Herndon, KS, 67723
"Hegel's"
Formula: (A
+ -A = A). What it really means.
revised 10-07-11 (approx. 106 pgs.
L-.64, R-.74, T-.75, B-.75)
I have broke this article down into several sections for easier
printing and reading:
Forward and Introduction
(approx. 60 pgs.)
Or if you
want to print them separately:
Forward (approx. 20 pgs.)
Introduction (approx. 40 pgs.)
Part 1 (approx. 32 pgs.)
Part 2 (approx. 15 pgs.)
Diaprax.
revised 01-17-11 (approx. 118 pgs.)
I expect only a few (one or two) to get through this article. It's
mostly for my own understanding.
A trilogy of the dialectical process (of Hegel and Marx fame), in the light of God's Word, and how it is affecting America (the American citizen) today.
1)
Diaprax: A spiraling process of
'changingness.' revised 04-03-11
(approx. 48 pgs.)
Hegel
revised
04-02-11 (approx. 4 pgs.) Hegel's
contempt for Christ & His righteousness; A sub-article to 'changingness'
article above
Freud.
revised 04-04-11 (approx. 4 pgs.) A synopsis of Sigmund Freud's 'history'; A
sub-article to 'changingness' article above.
2)
Diaprax: The Dialectical Formula.
revised 02-26-11 (approx. 7 pgs.)
3)
Diaprax: The dialectic process in
praxis is sin.
revised 01-26-11 (approx. 6
pgs.)
A "précis" of Bloom's Taxonomy.
revised 08-17-10; 01-30-12 (approx. 65+ pgs.)
The cognitive, affective, and psycho-motor domains and diaprax.
revised 08-17-10 (approx. 109 pgs.)
Notes: These are for meetings and a class on the dialectical process I teach.
Brief
(approx. 13 pgs.)
Knowing the
truth. (approx. 7 pgs.)
Man
and His Nature (approx. 13 pgs.)
Class Notes
(approx. 26 pgs.)
Syllabus of Diaprax Class (approx.3 pgs.)
Charts (approx. 3
pgs.)
"Messianic Judaism" and Paul's letter to the Galatians.
revised 12-26-09
The Identification of Paradigms: your paradigm determines your worth:.
revised 12-18-09
Since this
article is extensive—250 pages
±— I have
divided it into three parts for quicker downloading:
The Identification of Paradigms, Part I,
The Identification of Paradigms, Part II,
The Identification of Paradigms, Part III.
Civil
Disobedience and its side effects. revised
01-19-11 Original title "Civil Disobedience is Diaprax"
Concerning Bloom's Taxonomies. revised
03-06-09
A dopamine driven world.
revised 01-02-09
A
warning regarding the home
schooling movement. formerly titled
Liberation Theology Has Infiltrated the Home School Movement
revised
02-05-09
Diaprax Applied
(Rough Draft: in development; incomplete)
How to conduct yourself in the environment of Diaprax.
Two Roads: Didactic or Dialectic and their praxis
revised 03-08-2009
Dialectical
Christianity: the praxis of heresy
The Church Growth
& Emerging Church―diaprax
agenda: the diabolical practices by ministers.
The dialectical
drug culture. Facilitators: drug pushers.
The drug: the love of pleasure.
The outcome: consensus.
Church leadership doing Diaprax.
The attack is upon the American Middle-Class Family (Bourgeoisie)
by Government/Education/Work/Church
Benjamin Bloom and his Taxonomies compared to Karl Marx
Deductive and Inductive Reasoning Part I: To Compare or to
Contrast
that is the question. Understanding the New World Order.
Deductive and Inductive Reasoning Part II: Inductive Reasoning and Karl Marx.
Attacking the Patriarchal Family.
Deductive and Inductive
Reasoning Part III: Inductive Reasoning and Hilda Taba.
Attacking Patriarchal Education
Jürgen
Habermas and World "Peace"
Human Relations and
Curriculum Change, "A Cookbook For Humans." A Marxist training
manual.
The National Training Laboratories and the
benchmark for all educational grants―BSTEP
A cookbook for humans (The key to propagating
Marxism in America)
School-to-Work and the role Ralph Tyler played in
the sovietizing of America education and workplace.
Decoding the One World Government.
School-to-Work Opportunities Act Rosanna Ward
Facilitators—Wells
Without Water
W Brookover
A
Sociology of Education
The Defining Of "Patriot Extremists"
Christianity And Diaprax
General Systems—The Beast
Consensus &
The Conscience
Group Decisions
And Social Change
A Diverse
Group Of People, Dialoguing To Consensus, Over Social Issues, In A
Facilitated Meeting Is A Soviet.
Force
Field Analysis Applied To A School Situation.
DEMOCRATIC (REVOLUTIONARY) ETHICS IN SOCIAL ENGINEERING
School-To-Work And Its Use Of
Change Agents.
Regional
Training Laboratories (Federally funded Marxist training camps).
The Process
of OBE, TQM, STW, CG, EC, etc. and God's Position on Them.
"The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as
some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us–ward, not
willing that any should perish, but that all should come to
repentance. But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in
the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great
noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also
and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be
dissolved, what manner of persons out ye to be in all holy conversation and
godliness, looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein
the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with
fervent heat? Nevertheless, we, according to his promise, look for new heavens
and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. Wherefore, beloved, seeing
that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace,
without spot, and blameless." (2 Peter 3:9-14)
"Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope
to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of
Jesus Christ; As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to
the former lusts in your ignorance: But as he which hath called you is
holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; Because it is written,
Be ye holy; for I am holy. And if ye call on the Father, who without
respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your
sojourning here in fear: Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with
corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by
tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of
a lamb without blemish and without spot: Who verily was foreordained
before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for
you, Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and
gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God." (1 Peter 1:13-21)
© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2012