The so called Paradigm "Shift."
While children in rebellion against the Father still recognize His authority, children in revolution against the Father's authority (perceiving themselves as being the only authority) seek to negate it. "Paradigm 'shift'" is "the children of disobedience" seeking to negate the Father's authority in all the children's thoughts and actions—"in theory and in practice."
"For if a man think himself to be something [God], when he is nothing [not God], he deceiveth himself." Galatians 6:3
"'To approach pleasure or not to approach pleasure? That is the question." It is the only question asked, in the process of 'change.'
When we are born into this world we evaluate what is "good" and what is "evil" based upon our "human nature," i.e. according to our flesh. We determine what is "right" and what is "wrong" according to a spectrum of sensuousness, i.e. according to our "sense experiences," i.e. our "sensuous needs" and our "sense perception," which only proceed from "Nature" (Karl Marx), with the sensation of pain being bad and the sensation of pleasure being good. Therefore it is our nature to "approach pleasure and avoid pain." That is the dynamo from which "human nature" functions. Therefore all we have "going for us," in regards to the worth or value of the day, is that we have had more pleasure than pain. In other words, if there is too much pain, i.e. things go wrong and there is not enough pleasure, i.e. there is no satisfaction (we are coming into contact with more things in the environment that engender pain then stimulate pleasure, i.e. pleasure being dopamine emancipation—the sensation of pleasure which is emancipated in our body when we come into contact with things that are gratifying to the flesh), then the day was a bad day, i.e. a worthless (worth less than more) day, i.e. a waste of time. Conversely if we had pleasure, things went right and there was no pain (or little pain), then the day was worth while, i.e. the day was a good day.
This is the paradigm or way of thinking and acting from which dialectic 'reasoning' is engendered. According to dialectic 'reasoning,' 'reasoning' is made manifest when it is used as a tool to help man first 'discover' the source of pain and then 'emancipate' himself from it while at the same time recognizing and augmenting the conditions which engender pleasure, that being the totality of reality. This is the way of sensuousness, where "good" and "evil" is based upon a system of sensuousness (approaching pleasure-avoiding pain) with pleasure being "good" and pain being "bad." This is the way of the world, where the augmentation of pleasure and the attenuation of pain, i.e. becoming at-one-with all that is in the world (that is of pleasure) becomes the only 'purpose' of life, with dialectic 'reasoning' being used to that end, i.e. 'justifying' "human nature," i.e. "all that is of the world," as the "ground" from which to determine what is good and what is evil from. As the scriptures explain it: "For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." 1 John 2:16 It is why we are able to be tempted. "But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death." James 1:14, 15
When doing right and not doing wrong, despite the presence of pain or the absence of pleasure in doing it, becomes pleasure:
We, as children (more likely as babies), are introduced to a "new" way of thinking and acting when we are told by someone in the room that we "can not" or "must not" do something that we are doing or wanting to do (we hear the word "No!") , and then are inflicted with pain (chastened) when we do it. Wrath, like vengeance destroys, chastening reproves, so don't use wrath in place of chastening because vengeance is the Lords not ours to do. Chastening is to the degree that the baby or child can understand obedience without permanent physical or emotional damage—being "scared" of authority for no reason at all, i.e. paranoid. (Hebrews 12:5-11 explains it well—God does not give His children "a spirit of fear") This "new" way of thinking and acting (to the baby or child) is not based upon the sensuousness of approaching pleasure and avoiding pain. It is the "new" paradigm of finding pleasure instead in the one who inflicts pain to restrain us from pleasure, i.e. saying "No!" to our pursuit of pleasure and then punishing us (chastising us, inflicting pain upon us) when we ignore their command (in the pursuit of pleasure) and disobey them or rewarding us (by us receiving their approval) when we do.
This new paradigm is based upon "right" and "wrong" determined not from our own sensuousness (according to our nature) but according to commands given to us by another (greater than or above our own nature), commands to be obeyed without question, with pain or pleasure (punishment or reward) being used to encourage us to do what is right and not do what is wrong (according to them). It is an act of inculcation where our emotions (the affective domain) does not have part in making the final decision. Right and wrong, good and evil is therefore pre-determined for us, not of our own nature, not of the sensuous 'moment.' In other words right and wrong is not determined by us, where we determine according to our flesh, according to our desires, the right action to take.
While man, walking in the spirit, dead to himself, living according to God's nature only, says yea when it comes to doing God's will, man, walking in the flesh, dead to God, living according to his nature only, says yea when it comes to doing his will. But when the two (spirit and flesh) come together, there results a yea-nay tension, engendering a "guilty conscience." It is here, in the Father's authority, where our conscience is initiated and sustained. As Kurt Lewin formulated it: "The negative valence [the "guilty conscience"] of a forbidden object which in itself attracts the child thus usually derives from an induced field of force of [the chastening of the child by] an adult." (Kurt Lewin, A Dynamic Theory of Personality: Selected Papers)
While not being righteousness in and of itself (for only God is righteous in and of Himself), through chastening or the threat of it in regards to a commands given to us, we are introduced to a "new" system, a new paradigm, a new way of thinking and acting, i.e. the system of righteousness (by our parents or a higher authority than our nature, i.e. God restraining our "human nature"). This is a system not of our flesh, not engendered from our "human nature." There is no "Thou shalt not" in our "lust" for pleasure, in our Id. "Freud saw that in the id there is no negation, only affirmation and eternity. The instinctual reality is Dionysian drunkenness 'We can come nearer to the id with images, and call it a chaos, a cauldron of seething excitement." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)
This "new" system is a system which restraints the child from his "human nature," i.e. inhibiting or blocking him from following after his "natural inclination" to become at-one-with the world in pleasure, in the 'moment,' keeping him from "becoming his own person," "doing his own thing," loving the things of this world more than the Father or God. According to dialectic 'reasoning,' it separates him from himself, engendering "neurosis." "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 2:15-17
Right-wrong thinking is not of "human nature":
According to those of dialectic 'reasoning,' the system of righteousness, the patriarchal paradigm (or "top-down" way of thinking and acting), where parents or God establish the standards of what is right and what is wrong behavior (what are right and what are wrong ways of thinking and acting), is a system which prevents us from being (or becoming) "normal." It, according to them, is a system which engenders "neurosis," where a person is caught between what is real (the world according to them) and what is not (parental or Godly authority which, restraining "human nature," i.e. condemning carnal behavior, prevents man from being himself). "God is conceived more directly after a parental image and thus as a source of support and as a guiding and sometimes punishing authority." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) "When a man has finally reached the point where he does not think he knows it better than others, that is when he has become indifferent to what they have done badly and he is interested only in what they have done right, then peace and affirmation have come to him." (G. F. W. Hegel, in one of the casual notes preserved at Widener as quoted in Carl Friedrich, The Philosophy of Hegel)
The pleasure-pain spectrum (the "equality" of "human nature," i.e. the égalité of sensuousness) way of thinking and acting (of "the children of disobedience," of mankind, of the brotherhood, of the fraternité) can only be restoring (be liberated, be emancipated, i.e. experience liberté) by negating the antithesis condition of the right-wrong ("top-down," patriarchal) way of thinking and acting (of parents above children, God above man). It is when these two paradigms meet, i.e. "collide" (the paradigm of the children, "doing their own thing," being "themselves," approaching pleasure and avoiding pain, and the paradigm of the Father, giving commands to His children and chastening them when they disobey) that a condition of antithesis is engendered (a conflict between paradigms, "top-down" vs. "equality," is experienced). "Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse; A blessing, if ye obey the commandments of the LORD your God, which I command you this day: And a curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of the LORD your God, but turn aside out of the way which I command you this day, to go after other gods, which ye have not known." Deuteronomy 11:26-28 Deuteronomy 27:15-26 "Other gods" are created by man, according to the "spirit of the world."
Beginning with Adam and the women (Eve) in the garden in Eden, it is a condition which God has placed all mankind in, i.e. choosing either Him or the world, life or death, blessing or cursing. The world can only give you a 'choice' between pleasure or pain, only desiring and experiencing the things of this world in the fleeting 'moment,' according to the pleasure-pain spectrum of our carnal nature, while God gives us a choice between eternal life and eternal death. "For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels." Mark 8:36-38
"Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ." 1 Corinthians 2:12-16
Negating the right-wrong way of thinking and acting can only be accomplished by 'justifying' the pleasure-pain spectrum as being the only right way of thinking and acting: Rejecting, or not knowing God (not having heard His Word, but still knowing there is a God), and desiring an answer and a solution to the issues of life (attempting to resolve the antithesis condition according to his own nature), man turns to his own reasoning abilities and creates his own gods, gods of his own imagination, of his own understanding (including himself). Gods of man's own making are, like men, subject to the approaching of pleasure and the avoiding of pain, as well. Within the antithesis condition, a child (and therefore mankind) is caught between either "being himself," being "human," doing his own will, or obeying his Father, i.e. doing the Father (God's) will.
According to dialectic 'reasoning,' for the child to disobey the Father, i.e. not submit his will to the Father's will, a symptom of "neurosis" becomes manifest, i.e. the "guilty conscience." "Neurosis" (the "guilty conscience" is the effect of the traditional home, the environment where the child is given commands by his Father (commands, i.e. "categorical imperatives" to be obeyed without question) and is chastened when he disobeys them (disobeys Him), thereby setting his Father and His commands as the highest authority rather than his own "human nature." "The guilty conscience is formed in childhood by the incorporation of the parents and the wish to be father of oneself." "What we call 'conscience' perpetuates inside of us our bondage to past objects now part of ourselves: the super-ego 'unites in itself the influences of the present and of the past.'" "The new guilt complex appears to be historically connected with the rise of patriarchal religion (for the Western development the Hebrews are decisive)." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History) The "guilty conscience" is made manifest in the same conflict between the laws of the flesh and desire to obey God's (or your Father's) laws," as explained by the Apostle Paul* in Romans 7:14-25.
Only, according to dialectic 'reasoning,' the solution is not found in Christ, 'redeeming' us from sin and 'reconciling' us to the Father, but instead in the 'justifying' of "human nature" ('justifying' man's laws of the flesh, i.e. sin) as being "normal." The preaching and teaching of "human nature," i.e. the laws of the flesh, as being sin (where disobedience to the Father, in the pursuit of satisfying the laws of the flesh, i.e. being "normal," engendering a fear of chastisement or judgment from the Father) is perceived as being the cause of "neurosis," i.e. wrong thinking and acting. "Work done by Horkheimer in the thirties identified 'neurosis as a social product, in which the family was seen as a primary agent of repressive socialization.'" ( Erich Fromm, Marx's Concept of Man, as quoted in Stephen Eric Bronner, Of Critical Theory and Its Theorists) "The bondage of all cultures to their cultural heritage is a neurotic construction." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History) "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." (Erich Fromm, Escape from Freedom)
How to negate the conflict between the two paradigms.
According to those of dialectic 'reasoning.'
Dialectic 'reasoning' declares: when doing right according to another persons will (seeking after and insisting upon righteousness) becomes pain to self and to others, it becomes wrong. According to those possessed of dialectic 'reasoning,' the solution to the condition of antithesis, i.e. to the condition of "neurosis," i.e. to the "guilty conscience," to the effect of the Father's authority over the child (not only in the individual but also in society, i.e. all children as well) is to create the condition of synthesis (the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus) where the child and therefore society (all children) can be detoxified of the effects of the patriarchal paradigm, 'liberated' from the system of righteousness (freed from the preaching and teaching of "It is written," "Dad says," "Thus saith the Lord," etc.), so that man (the child) can become himself again, as he was before the Father's first command and threat of chastening (or in Gods' case, condemnation) for disobedience (thereby initiating his office of authority—and then, through his use of chastening, sustain it).
Their solution to the conflict (antithesis) between the Father and the children, God and mankind, or according to dialectic 'reasoning' (key to understanding the meaning of the "new" world order), reversing the order, i.e. the conflict between the children and the Father, mankind and God, is to negate the condition which engenders the Father's or God's authority (negate the use of chastening to enforce rules, rules which are not of man's making, not made through consensus— consensus can only be arrived at by uniting upon to that which is common with all mankind, i.e. common to all children, i.e. "human nature"), thereby negating the Father, or God himself (the fear of God), from the thoughts and actions of the next generation, and therefore from society itself (all children as well). As Kurt Lewin formulated it: "If this field of force loses its psychological existence for the child (e.g., if the adult goes away or loses his authority) [if the child fears no chastisement or judgment for his carnal thoughts or carnal actions, i.e. for being "human"] the negative valence [the "guilty conscience"] also disappears." (Kurt Lewin, A Dynamic Theory of Personality: Selected Papers) While with man, adultery might be an act of immorality, with God a man "looking on a woman to lust after her" is an act of adultery "in his heart," i.e. is sin. "But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." Matthew 5:28 According to dialectic 'reasoning,' with "sin" no longer an issue (because judgment by God or the Father is no longer an issue), "lust" is no longer an issue of life, having simply become one of the "enjoyments" of "human nature," a pleasure of the carnal life.
According to those of dialectic 'reasoning,' by creating a "new" world order of abomination, i.e. an "order" without any fear of the Father or God restraining (judging and condemning) his carnal impulses and urges, man could become himself again. It is what Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, and George Hegel had in common. Marx wrote: "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) Freud wrote: "'It is not really a decisive matter whether one has killed one's father or abstained from the deed,' if the function of the conflict and its consequences are the same." (Sigmund Freud in Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization) Hegel wrote: "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)
Negating righteousness by 'justifying' sensuousness makes dialectic 'reasoning' the "light" of the world, "helping" man to become "normal" (carnal, i.e. freed of a "guilty conscience") again:
Paradigm 'shift' is simple the dialectic ideology that man is only man (children are children) and that by removing the fear of God from the thoughts and the actions of man (removing from the thoughts and actions of the child the fear of judgment for disobeying the parent ), he can become himself again, 'shifting' his thoughts and actions, his paradigm, from being obedient to God to being true to his own carnal nature, i.e. being himself again, liberating not only himself but society as well from the effects of the patriarchal paradigm, i.e. delivering mankind from "neurosis." This is what "health care" means to anyone who is "affected" with dialectic 'reasoning' where the 'purpose' of life is to negate the system of righteousness so that man could become purely sensuous again, subject only to the system of sensuousness, i.e. "human nature," that which is of the world only, i.e. "of Nature only" (Karl Marx). This is made possible only through man's use of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. the 'justifying' of "human nature," the laws of the flesh, as being "normal," the same system of thought first put into practice (praxis) in a garden in the land of Eden (Genesis 3:1-6).
In the end, paradigm 'shift' is not a 'shift' at all. It is a paradigm 'change:'
Paradigm 'shift' ('shifting' back to the nature of the child, i.e. to "human nature") is the rejection of the Father's authority to author commands to His children and chasten them when they disobey. It is the negation of the system of righteousness in the thoughts and actions of men and thereby the negation of righteousness (the Word of the Lord God) in the thoughts and actions of men as well, which keeps all who are deceived (deceived through their use of dialectic 'reasoning,' 'justifying' themselves before themselves, making their "human nature" the standard whereby to know right from wrong) subject to eternal damnation, blinded to any hope of eternal life. It is Satan's paradigm of 'change,' his Genesis project (as explained in Genesis 3:1-6), i.e. the rejection of God and eternal life, it is a world where the children rule over themselves, i.e. rule according to their own nature, i.e. according to sin (are controlled by the world, according to their lusts and pride) as was first experienced by two in the garden in Eden. It is "experiencing God," without God Himself being present, it is man being God instead. "In the process of history [man becoming himself, i.e. children becoming themselves again, liberated from the restraints of the Father] man gives birth to himself. He becomes what he potentially is [carnal], 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)
Paradigm 'shift' is actually paradigm 'change:' it is "redeeming" man from righteousness, "reconciling" him back to the world, "redeeming" him from "top-down" thinking and acting, "reconciling" him to "equality" thinking and acting, making him at-one-with the world again (before the Father's first command and threat of chastening):
Thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, where synthesis eventually negates antithesis until antithesis reappears to judge thesis and negate synthesis:
The dialectic process is know as a thesis, antithesis, and synthesis cycle of 'change.' The first thesis is usually taught as being the Father but at closer inspection, according to dialectic 'reasoning,' it is the child, i.e. "human nature," (man's thoughts and actions untampered with, i.e. unrestrained by the Father, where man is free to be himself, no longer accepting the word of God "as is," obeying it only, i.e. living by faith). According to dialectic 'reasoning,' (a Gnostic structure), it is when the Father introduces commands, using chastening to sustain them (sustaining his position of authority as well), thus restraining "human nature" (restraining man's quest, or in this case the child's quest to know himself as he is) that the antithesis condition appears. The synthesis is the use of 'reasoning' (dialogue) to bring the child and the Father (differing positions) together (for a 'moment') on a social issue (evaluating the condition of their relationship or lack of it, "equality" being "positive" and "top-down" being "negative"). Using the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, moves the Father away from His position to the direction of His and the child's "feelings," since there is no Father's authority in dialogue, dialogue making the Father and the child "equal" for the 'moment.' With the Father-child's agreement on a "feeling," i.e. on an opinion, arrived at through the use of the dialectic process, a new thesis is then created. Two or more, dialoging their differences to a "logical" or "rational" agreement, negates the "Mine, not yours" way of thinking and acting of all parties involved, making their new "position" "Ours." Eventually, with enough praxis, their "new" way of thinking and acting becomes communitarian. "The individual accepts the new system of values and beliefs by accepting belongingness to the group." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)
The process continues with the next issue of contention (next antithesis event) being dialogued to a consensus (synthesis), i.e. the Father's authority progressively being negated in the process, the thoughts and actions ("sense experiences") of both the Father and the child being 'changed,' with the child, i.e. "human nature" progressively being freed from the Father's paradigm (His "top-down" way of thinking and acting), i.e. 'changing' both (the Father being 'changed,' i.e. moved from His use of the patriarchal paradigm to initiate and sustain His position of authority, and the child being 'changed' from follow after it, i.e. accepting commands to be obeyed "as given" and the use of chastening to enforce that way of thinking and acting, now being questioned, i.e. "questioning authority," both becoming "equals" in thought and in action), through the dialogue of opinions, through their use of "reasoning," thinking from the "position" of "feelings" (where there is no position, no Father's authority) the Father and the son become "one" in nature only (Karl Marx), negating the Father's "top-down" authority (and therefore the "guilty conscience" in the child since there is no Father's authority to disobey, i.e. to "feel" guilty about for disobeying).
The process continues until there is eventually no Father's authority left on the face of the earth (at least that is the hope of some), where worldly peace and socialist harmony has been arrived at, i.e. righteousness (and the righteous) having been removed from the thought and the actions of all "the people" on face of the earth, a place and time when and where (in time and space) man is finally only man, united upon only that which he has in common, i.e. his "human nature," a condition known as communism. Then Armageddon, i.e. the Father's authority, through the only begotten Son of God, reappears, as God in the garden in Eden, to judge the process for what it is, abomination. In the end there is only the Father and the children, the dialectic idea that there is only the children (with no Father's authority to be concerned about) is the great deception.
Thesis, antithesis, and synthesis where synthesis (the process of 'change') eventually negate antithesis (the Father's authority) until antithesis (the Father, through His only begotten Son) reappears to judge thesis ("the children of disobedience") and negate synthesis (the process of 'change'). The great deception, is man perceiving the spectrum of approaching pleasure and avoiding pain, i.e. that which is of the flesh, i.e. that which is subject to the "equality" system of sensuousness, as being the soul, when the soul is instead subject only to the "top-down" paradigm of right and wrong, i.e. subject only to the system of righteousness. "There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 14:12 While the Word of God speaks to the soul of man, the opinions of men only speak to the deceitful and wicked hearts of unredeemed men, with men, through dialectic 'reasoning,' 'justifying' their deceitful and wicked heart, perceiving it as being "normal." "This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness. But ye have not so learned Christ; If so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus: That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." Ephesians 4:17-24
Instead of being concerned about whether "'To approach pleasure or not to approach pleasure?" we are to live our lives in this world: "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 12:2
Putting your hand to the plow and not looking left or right (not looking left to avoid pain or right to approach pleasure) and putting on the armor of God and standing (not running after pleasure or running away from pain) is what God's paradigm of righteousness is all about, i.e. being like Jesus Christ, doing the Father's will, enduring the rejection of men to the end, "for the joy" that lies ahead. "Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;" 2 Corinthians 10:5 "But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will." 2 Timothy 2:26 "For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith." 2 Timothy 3:6-8
The political consequences of "No fear" (no fear of God):
Most conservative, especially Christians, are running away from the Word of God as fast as they can, out of the fear of being labeled (telling me by their actions, that they are ashamed of the gospel—Mark 8:36-38). What the "conservatives" in this nation have not realized is that when you get rid of "fear of God," you get rid of all your inalienable rights. What made the constitution unique, especially the addition of the "bill of rights," was that the conscience of the citizens (along with their representatives) limited the power of government, i.e. restrained the makers of law from using the office of government for their own (as well as for other agencies or organizations) 'purpose.' There is no conscience (fear of God) and therefore no private property in the praxis of consensus (in the "collective" voice of "the people").
Most people today think that the consensus process is all about make the workplace and the world a "better" place to work and play within. It is not. Besides negating the understanding of and the supporting of private rights i.e. inalienable rights, as in private property, "Mine, not yours" and therefore "Yours, not mine," replacing them with public rights, i.e. "human rights, as in public property, "Ours, not just yours," it is really about the praxis of sin, i.e. the use of the system of Genesis 3:1-6 to "redeem" the soul of man from God, "reconciling" him back to the world, fulfilling the last days, as in the days of Noah. "For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." Matthew 24:38, 39
"Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children; And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour. But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints; Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks. For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. Be not ye therefore partakers with them. For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light: (For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;) Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord. And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret. But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light. Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light. See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, Redeeming the time, because the days are evil. Wherefore be ye not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is. Ephesians 5:1-17
*The difference between the day of the Apostle Paul and ours is that he lived in a time when most men did not know, i.e. had not heard the gospel, and were therefore, for the most part willing to listen (other than the "religious," i.e. those righteous in and of themselves—why he wrote Romans, warning believers not to be taken captive to that way of thinking), while we live in a time when most people do know, having heard the gospel, yet refuse to listen (though they claim to have "listening skills"), having, through their use of dialectic 'reasoning,' embraced the system of sensuousness over and against the system of righteousness (sight over and against faith, flesh over and against spirit, man over and against God, "the children of disobedience" over and against the Father), correlating (synthesizing) 'righteousness' with "human nature" (the approaching of pleasure and the avoidance of pain as the standard from which to determine what is "good" and what is "evil"), thereby negating righteousness (the fear of God and love of His Word) in their thoughts and actions. "For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God." Romans 10:30 has been 'changed' to: knowing of God's righteousness, they have instead established themselves upon themselves, making themselves ("human nature") 'righteousness' instead, becoming abomination.
"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." "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet." "And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." Romans 1:25-32
© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2012-2015
"To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David. The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good. The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one." Psalms 14:1-3
"Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain." 1 Corinthians 3:18-20
"Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. 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 6:4
"For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: That no flesh should glory in his presence." 1 Corinthians 1:18-29
"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
"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 2012-2015