"Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths." Proverb. 3: 5-6
"It is not in man that walketh to direct his steps." Jeremiah 10:23
The Institution for Authority Research
(to go directly to the links)
The Formula: Thesis - Antithesis - Synthesis?
Whatever you place in Thesis determines the Antithesis (and the outcome).
"Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee." Isaiah 26:3
"For this cause [because they "did not like to retain God in their knowledge"] God gave them up unto vile affections:" Romans 1:21, 25
"Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth." Colossians 3:2
The only way to arrive at Synthesis (consensus, i.e., the "new" world order) is through dialogue, i.e., through dialectic 'reasoning,'
i.e., reasoning from "sense experience," i.e., from everyone's "sensuous needs" and "sense perception" (opinion) of the 'moment,'
with everyone 'justifying' (affirming) themselves before one another,
negating anything that is antithetical to "sense experience" in the process. (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3)
Reasoning from God's Word and 'reasoning' from your "sense experiences" are antithetical to one another.
To make God's Words subject to "sense experience," i.e., to how you and others feel and what you and they think, i.e., to man's opinion is the praxis of deception,
i.e., Satan joining the "church" to help it "grow."
"No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." Luke 16:13
Preaching and teaching (and discussing, at the father's/Father's discretion) the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth (the Word of God) makes the father's/Father's authority, i.e., doing the father's/Father's will (doing right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth) the Thesis ⇒ Individualism / Local control / Nationalism / Kingdom of God ⇒ sovereignty/"Mine, Not yours," restraining the child's carnal nature, making "human nature" the Antithesis, thereby blocking/preventing
Synthesis (no Marxism / Socialism / Communitarianism / Internationalism / Globalism), i.e., no " As above, so below. As below, so above." (no " Liberté" based upon " Equalité," based upon " Fraternité" and visa versa).
"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
Dialoguing opinions to a consensus or rather opinions dialogued to a consensus (opinions liberalize, i.e., liberate everyone from the father's/Father's authority, dialogue equalizes, i.e., makes everyone the same in nature, i.e., in desiring pleasure and resenting restraint, and consensus fraternizes, i.e., brings everyone together as "one")—based upon everyone's "feeling's" ("sensuous needs" and "sense perception") of the 'moment,' i.e., everyone's "sense experience"—makes everyone's "feelings," i.e., the carnal nature of the child (the child's love of the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' and his or her hate of restraint, i.e., the father's/Father's authority), i.e., "self" 'justification' the Thesis ⇒ Marxism / Socialism / Communitarianism / Internationalism / Globalism ⇒ "new" world order/Synthesis, i.e., "We working for us," i.e., "Liberté, Equalité, Fraternité," i.e., "self " 'justification' before men, i.e., no
father's/Father's authority., i.e., no Individualism / Local control / Nationalism / Kingdom of God , i.e., sovereignty or true representative government. "Authority" is retained, but only in those who have no guilty conscience in doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, serving "the peoples" best interest, i.e., their "self interest," turning a deaf ear to, i.e., having no compassion for or mercy on those who get in "the people's" way, i.e., in their way—when they no longer serve their 'purpose,' i.e., support them with money, time, and praise, 'justifying' their carnal way of thinking and acting, i.e., bring them pleasure (in the name of "the people," i.e., democracy, i.e., socialism, i.e., globalism, i.e., Common-ism).
"[W]e recognize the point of view that truth and knowledge are only relative and that there are no hard and fast truths which exist for all time and places." (Benjamin Bloom, et al., Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Book 1, Cognitive Domain, p. 32)
"Science is only genuine science when it proceeds from sense experience, in the two forms of sense perception and sensuous need, that is, only when it proceeds from Nature." (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3)
"Neither the Bible nor the prophets, neither the revelations of God can take precedence over my own direct experience." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)
"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 2:15-17
How you communicate with others, especially in a crisis, reveals your paradigm., i.e., your adaptability or your inadaptability to 'change,' i.e., whether you are Heresiarch in paradigm (of and for self and the world) or Patriarch in paradigm (subject to the father's/Father's authority). A paradigm is the way you feel, think, and act, i.e., relate with your "self," others, and the world, as well as how you respond to authority. Which paradigm you are is revealed in the words you use in order to communicate with others. "I know," "The truth is," "The facts are" is antithetical to "I feel" and "I think." "Truth and knowledge" based upon "sensuous needs," "sense perception," and "sense experience," i.e., "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life" is of the world only ("behavior science") and is antithetical to truth and knowledge based upon hearing requiring faith and obedience. The former makes you in the image of an animal, carnal, of the world only, living for the 'moment,' the later in the image of God, eternal, i.e., accountable to an "external authority" greater than your "self," i.e., greater than your "sense experience." The words you use and structure of communication go hand in hand. You can not say "I know" (hold to a position) in an opinion. You can not say "I feel" or "I think" (express an opinion) and keep your position, i.e., maintain faith. Truth and knowledge, based upon commands, rules, facts, and truth preached and taught, i.e., "It is written," "Because I said so," inhibits or blocks 'change.' "I feel" and "I think," i.e., the language of an opinion or theory, i.e., the language of a scientist trying to 'discover' that which is of the world, i.e., material, i.e., of nature only (yet not certain he is right, i.e., does not "know"), initiates and sustains 'change.' Those of dialectic 'reasoning' (dialogue) must respond to belief as an opinion and facts and truth as a theory or they fall "victim" to, i.e., become accountable to the father's/Father's authority, i.e., become guilty for their doing wrong, disobeying, sinning. This is why they ask you for your opinion, i.e., how you "feel" and what you "think" (regarding personal-social issues), i.e., insisting upon everyone being "positive," sharing their opinion (instead of being "negative," preaching and teaching their parent's, teachers', bosses, etc., and/or God's commands, rules, facts, and truth to be accepted as is by faith and obeyed) thereafter treating all commands, rules, facts, or truth you share (preach and/or teach) as an opinion, trying to draw you (through "the group's" resenting your preaching and teaching, rejecting you because you are hurting their "feelings," i.e., not being "reasonable") into dialogue, in order to get you to participate in their dialectic game (trap), i.e., the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process, so they can do wrong, disobey, sin without having a guilty conscience, i.e., so they can do wrong, disobey, sin with impunity, since you, affirming their carnal nature made your and their "self," i.e., your and their "sensuous needs," "sense perception," and "sense experience," i.e., "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life" the basis of truth and knowledge, making your and their "self," i.e., "the group," i.e., "the people" one and the same ("one for all and all for one"), i.e., of (and now for) the world (nature) only, i.e., Marxists. To be silent (not to correct, reprove, rebuke) in the midst of unrighteousness is to consent, i.e., is to affirm unrighteousness, making unrighteousness the "norm"—making anyone who speaks out, i.e., corrects, reproves, rebukes unrighteousness, an enemy of the dialectic state.
"We must develop persons who see non-influencability of private convictions in joint deliberations as a vice rather than a virtue." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)
Preaching commands and rules to be obeyed as given and teaching facts and truth to be accepted as is, by faith makes the father's/Father's authority, i.e., "doing right and not wrong" according to the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., doing the father's/Father's will the Thesis, with the guilty conscience, i.e., "private convictions" inhibiting or blocking Antithesis, i.e., the carnal nature of the child from taking control, thus preventing the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, i.e., the "new" world order (Synthesis) from becoming 'reality.' Dialoguing opinions to a consensus makes the carnal nature of the child the Thesis, initiating and sustaining the "new" world order (Synthesis), negating the Antithesis, i.e., the "old" world order, i.e., the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the preaching and teaching of the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and true to be accepted as given, by faith, and obeyed, so that children can do wrong, disobey, sin, i.e., be "human," i.e., be their "self" without having a guilty conscience, i.e., so they can do wrong, disobey, sin with impunity.
"[Kurt] Lewin emphasized that the child takes on the characteristic behavior of the group in which he is placed. . . . he reflects the behavior patterns which are set by the adult leader of the group." (Wilbur Brookover, A Sociology of Education) "The individual [the child] accepts the new system of values and beliefs [Marxism, Humanism, Socialism, Environmentalism, Globalism, Common-ism (all the same in Paradigm, i.e., in thought and action, i.e., in "theory and practice")] by accepting belongingness to the group [group approval or affirmation]." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Bennie, Human Relations in Curriculum Change) Karl Marx explained it this way: "It is not individualism [under God's and/or the parent's, bosses, etc., authority] that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society ["the group"] is the necessary framework through which freedom [from the father's/Father's authority and the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning] and individuality [to be one's "self," i.e., "of and for self," i.e., carnal, i.e., of the world only without having a guilty conscience] are made realities." (Karl Marx, in John Lewis, The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx) "There are many stories of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain)
Add the affective domain, i.e., the child's "feelings" of the 'moment' to the classroom curriculum and you 'change' the world. The child enters the classroom subject to the parent's (the father's/Father's) authority. By adding the affective domain to the curriculum, making the child's opinion, i.e., his "feelings", i.e., his desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' a part of the classroom exercise (the child's classroom experience), i.e., encouraging him to dialogue his opinion with the other children in the classroom to a consensus ("group grade") 'changes' the way the child "feels," thinks, and acts, and relates with his "self," others, and the world (as well as how he responds to authority) results in the child leaving the classroom 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority. Once the child is 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority in the classroom, instead of finding his identity in his parent's, finding his identity in the other students, i.e., in "the group," i.e., in "the people" instead—for obvious reasons called "class consciousness"—he no longer has faith in or desires to obey his parents, i.e., he no longer honors and respects the father's/Father's authority, questioning, challenging, disregarding, defying, attacking his parent's, i.e., his parent's authority, i.e., the father's/Father's authority when he gets home instead. Nobody has to tell him to do it. He does it naturally, i.e., according to "human nature."
"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." "I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me." "For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak." John 5:19, 30; 12:47-50 "For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother." Matthew 12:50
The child's carnal nature ("human nature") is "of the world," and therefore is antithetical to the father's/Father's authority. It is through dialogue, i.e., through the child talking to his "self" that the child's carnal nature is 'justified' in his eyes, establishing his "self" over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority. 'Liberate' ('justify') the child's carnal nature through dialogue with other children in the classroom and the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning is negated in the child's feelings, thoughts, and actions, as well as in his relationship with others and the world, resulting in the child doing wrong, disobeying, sinning with impunity, i.e., with no sense of guilt.
"[E]very one of us shall give account of himself to God." Romans 14:12
Only God knows what you are talking to your "self" about. When you leave God out, in your conversation with your "self," you become God yourself, making you subject to pleasure and the world stimulating it, therefore making you subject to anyone manipulating the current situation (see the facilitator of 'change' link below). Your opinion, i.e., your "I feel," i.e., your "sensuous needs" and your "I think," i.e., your "sense perception" of the 'moment' is antithetical to established facts or truth, i.e., to an "I know," i.e., to the father's/Father's authority ("Because I said so."/"It is written, ..."). The father/Father, while preaching and teaching commands, rules, facts and truth to be accepted as is, by faith and obeyed as given, persuades (and is persuaded) through discussion, maintaining his position of authority in the process—while, for the earthly father, possibly changing his position on an issue when the facts and truth convince him that he is wrong, i.e., that he is not right. The child, on the other hand, subject to his "feelings," i.e., his desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment,' dialogues his opinion (his "I feel," i.e., "sensuous needs" and his "I think," i.e., "sense perception") with his "self" (at first) and then with others (if given the opportunity) in order to get his way, making the child easily manipulatable. How children, men, and women talk to their "self" reveals whether they—reproving, correcting, rebuking, humbling, denying, controlling, disciplining (preaching to) their "self," i.e., doing the Father's will—fear God or—"esteeming" and "actualizing" ('justifying') their "self," are of and for the world, i.e., "of and for self" only—have "no fear of God before their eyes." (Romans 3:18)
"Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked." Exodus 23:7
According to dialectic 'reasoning' laws must be tied to a persons "feelings," i.e., opinion of the 'moment,' making them readily adaptable to 'change,' instead of to established commands and rules, which make them unchangeable, i.e., unadaptable to, i.e., resistant to 'change.' Immanuel Kant's "Zweckmäßigkeit ohne Zweck; Gesetzmäßigkeit ohne Gesetz," i.e. "purposiveness without purpose; lawfulness without law" simply made law the product of "human nature," i.e., direct experience, i.e., the child's "sense experience," i.e., "sensuous needs" and "sense perception" of the 'moment' instead of the father's/Father's authority and the purpose of life augmenting pleasure instead of doing the father's/Father's will. (Immanuel Kant, Critique of Judgment) Therefore Georg Hegel, Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, etc. established 'reality' upon the carnal nature of the child over (and therefore against) the father's/Father's authority (as explained in their quotes below). It is therefore only through the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus (the soviet system, i.e., the consensus process—a different name for the same beast, i.e., monster) that laws can be 'changed,' i.e., made adaptable to the "felt" needs of "the people," i.e., to the "felt" needs of the seducer, deceiver, and manipulator of the people, i.e., the facilitator of 'change.'
"The philosophers [children thinking about how the world "is," subject to the father's/Father's authority and how it "ought" to be, subject to their will , i.e., their "feelings," i.e., their desires of the 'moment' instead] have only interpreted the world in different ways [established their opinion as the only right way, thus inhibiting or blocking 'change'], the objective however, is change [the process of 'change' itself, i.e., the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, putting consensus into praxis, i.e., into social action, negating the father's/Father's authority]." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #11)
According to dialectic 'reasoning,' it is not in the fact that a law is 'changed' but in the process (praxis) of 'changing' it that 'reality' resides. You persuade with facts and truth. You manipulate with "feelings," i.e., you manipulate "human resource" with "feelings," i.e., with "sensuous needs" ("lust of the flesh") and "sense perception" ("lust of the eyes"). If you accept being "human resource" I hope you like being manipulated, i.e., getting up in the morning, going to work, looking forward to being used (and discarded—you can call it re-cycled if it makes you "feel" better, i.e., enjoy deceiving your "self") as natural resource. If you get pleasure out of manipulating other people, I suppose then it makes it OK, at least in your eyes. That way, if you do it in the name of "the people," i.e., for the sake of the children (loving pleasure, hating restraint and the restrainer) you can get away with murder and not "feel" bad about it, i.e., not "feel" guilty—like your doing something wrong, wicked, or evil. Karl Marx summed it up this way: "The justice of state constitutions is to be decided not on the basis of Christianity, not from the nature of Christian society [doing right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's will, having a guilty conscience when you do wrong, disobey, sin] but from the nature of human society [according to the "felt" needs of the child, i.e., "the people," i.e.., according to the "felt" needs ("lusts") of the facilitator of 'change,' i.e., doing wrong, disobeying, sinning with no guilty conscience]." "The state arises out of the exigencies of man's [carnal] nature." "Laws must not fetter human life; but yield to it; they must change as the needs and capacities of the people [the facilitator of 'change'] change." "To enjoy the present reconciles us to the actual . . ." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right') It is why R. W. Makepeace and Croom Helm could write in their book, Marxist Ideology and Soviet Criminal Law, "Jurisprudence of terror takes two forms; loosely defined rules which produces unpredictable law, and spontaneous changes in rules to best suit the state." The child, while getting great pleasure in helping the stranger look for his lost dog (responding to the crisis of the 'moment'), will suffer great harm at his hands once he, i.e., the facilitator of 'change' gets him under his control, using him for his own pleasure and gain. When men and women respond to the crisis of the 'moment' in a facilitated meeting the outcome is the same, only in their case instead of being a pedophile the facilitator of 'change' becomes their pimp.
"The child, contrary to appearance, is the absolute, the rationality of the relationship; he is what is enduring and everlasting, the totality which produces itself once again as such [once he is 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority so that he can be his "self," i.e., as he was before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into his life, i.e., carnal, i.e., of the world only, but now under the control of facilitators of 'change']." (Georg Hegel, System of Ethical Life)
"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 life which he [the child] has given to the object [to the father] sets itself against him as an alien and hostile force." (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3, pp. 83-84)
"'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[there is no father's authority getting in the child's way]." (Sigmund Freud in Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization)
"God is conceived more directly after a parental image and thus as a source of support and as a guiding and sometimes punishing authority." "Family relationships are characterized by fearful subservience to the demands of the parents and by an early suppression of impulses not acceptable to them." "Authoritarian submission was conceived of as a very general attitude that would be evoked in relation to a variety of authority figures—parents, older people, leaders, supernatural power, and so forth." "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." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)
"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 superego 'unites in itself the influences of the present [our "feelings," i.e., carnal desires of the 'moment'] and of the past [our "feelings," i.e., carnal desires of the past].'" (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)
"If the guilt accumulated in the civilized domination of man by man [with the father/Father ruling over his children/mankind, "repressing" "human nature"] can ever be redeemed by freedom [where everyone can be their "self," of the world only], 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)
It is the father's/Father's authority that stands in the way of Synthesis, i.e., the "new" world order, i.e., globalism. Therefore those who promote dialectic 'reasoning' place the child, i.e., the carnal nature of the child , i.e., everyone's "feelings" (desires and dissatisfactions) of the 'moment' in the Thesis position, through dialogue making the father's/Father's authority, doing right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth (faith and obedience) the Antithesis. In doing so the father's/Father's authority is negated in the child's "feelings," thoughts, and actions, as well as in his or her relationship with the other children of the world. By making the child, i.e., the child's carnal nature the Thesis a "new" world order is 'created,' based upon "human nature," i.e., upon the carnal nature of the child only, overcoming the "old" world order with its father's/Father's authority of restraint. According to dialectic 'reasoning' it is only in the child's thoughts (opinion) and relationship with others (through dialogue) that 'liberation' from the father's/Father's authority can become a reality. Therefore the child's "sensuous needs" ("lust of the flesh") and "sense perception" ("lust of the eyes"), i.e., "sense experience" ("all that is of the world," i.e., "the pride of life") must be taken into consideration (is essential) in making any decision. (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3)
"The dialectical method was overthrown―the parts were prevented from finding their definition within the whole [the children were prevented from 'discovering' their common-ism with the world]." (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness; What is Orthodox Marxism?)
If you make the father's/Father's authority the Thesis, the carnal nature of the child becomes the Antithesis, engendering a "guilty conscience" in the child for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in the process, preventing 'change.' In other words, if you make preaching and teaching doing right and not wrong, according to the father's/Father's commands and rules the agenda ("old school"), then the child's "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., his or her loving and approaching the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' and hating and avoiding pain, i.e., refusing to accept chastening, i.e., correction, thus missing out on the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which he or she desires, i.e., hating restraint and the restrainer, becomes the source of conflict and tension, i.e., the Antithesis. It is the father's/Father's chastening or threat of chastening for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning that engenders a "guilty conscience" in the child when he or she is thinking about doing wrong, disobeying, sinning. By the child learning to restrain (control, discipline, humble, deny) his or her "self," he or she inhibits or blocks his or her "self" from becoming "at-one-with" the world, preventing Synthesis. The child, therefore, basing right and wrong upon the father's/Father's commands and rules instead of upon what he or she has in common with all the children of the world, i.e., "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life," i.e., that which is "not of the Father" but is "of the world" only, inhibits or blocks 'change,' i.e., prevents the "new" world order from become the 'drive' and the 'purpose' of his or her life, i.e., prevents "the parts," i.e., the children "from finding their definition within the whole," within their "self" and the other children of the world. 1 John 2:16 It is only through dialogue that children can find their identity in one another, 'liberating' their "self" from the father's/Father's authority, having to do the father's/Father's will. By increasing, through dialogue and affirmation, the child's love of "self" and others (the world), dissatisfaction with authority is increased, with authorities restraint increasing the child's hostility (hatred) toward authority (restraint).
"The individual may have 'secret' thoughts [carnal desires and dissatisfactions] which he will under no circumstances reveal to anyone else if he can help it. To gain access is particularly important, for precisely here may lie the individual's potential for ... thought and action in crucial situations." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)
"In 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)]
But, if you make the child's carnal nature the Thesis, the father's/Father's authority becomes the Antithesis, making Synthesis a possibility, negating the "guilty conscience" for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in the process. In other words if you focus upon the child's "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., if you make his or her desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' along with his or her dissatisfaction with restraint (the father's/Father's authority) the basis of communication, then that which he or she has in common with all the children of the world becomes the foundation from which to determine right from wrong, making Synthesis, i.e., a "feeling" of "oneness" with his or her "self," with other children (having the same love of pleasure and hate of restraint), and the world can be initiated and sustained, engendering Marxism, i.e., socialism, communism, globalism, etc., negating the father's/Father's authority and the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in the process. Synthesis is the child 'discovering,' through dialogue, his or her common identity with the children of the world, with all the children 'justifying' their "self," i.e., 'justifying' their desire for the carnal pleasures of the moment and their resentment toward restraint, negating the father's/Father's authority in their "feelings," thoughts, and actions as well as in their relationship with one another and the world, making themselves "of (and for) the world" ("of and for self") only instead.
"The philosopher Hegel said that truth is not found in the thesis nor the antithesis but in an emerging synthesis which reconciles the two." (Martin Luther King Jr., Strength to Love)
"Reconciliation," according to Hegel, is not that the child, submitting himself or herself to the father's/Father's authority, becomes "at-one-with" the father/Father, but that the father/Father, abdicating his/His authority, becomes "at-one-with" the child, allowing the child to be his "self," of and for the world only. According to Hegel, "truth" can only be 'discovered' through dialogue and is not to be preached and taught by the father/Father— to be accept as is by faith, and obey.
"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 "Let no man deceive you with vain words ["self" 'justifying' words]: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. Be not ye therefore partakers with them." Ephesians 5:5-7 "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 4:22-24
Synthesis is children deceived in believing that "pleasure" (that which they "covet") is the standard for "good" (instead of doing right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's will). Believing that they are "good" or that they can become "good" by doing "good works" for others (augmenting pleasure), which makes them "feel good," they are able to "feel good" about their "self." 'Justifying' their "self before men," taking pleasure in affirming the "goodness" in others as others affirm the "goodness" in them, they are able to 'justify' the deceitfulness and wickedness of their heart, i.e., 'justify' their "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' as well as their hatred toward restraint and the restrainer, making themselves (through the consensus process) "children of disobedience," subject to "the wrath of God," preparing themselves for "damnation."
"And through covetousness [your carnal desires of the 'moment'] shall they with feigned words [double speak; plastic words] make merchandise ["human resource"] of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not." 2 Peter 2:3
The moment you are "asked" to be "positive" and not "negative" you are being manipulated, i.e., you are being told to put the child's carnal nature , i.e., your "self interest" over and therefore against the father/Father and his/His authority, i.e., doing the father's/Father's will. In your consent (Synthesis) with others, you negate the father's/Father's authority in your feelings, thoughts, and actions, and in your relationship with others and the world, creating a "new" world order based upon the child's carnal nature, so that all children can do wrong, disobey, sin with impunity, i.e., with no sense of "guilt."
"If the 'restoring of life' of the world is to be conceived in terms of the Christian revelation, then Marx must collapse into a bottomless abyss." (Jürgen Habermas, Theory and Practice)
Georg Hegel, Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud and those following in their dialectic (dialoguing opinions to a consensus) pathway would not want it any other way, i.e., you making pleasure (instead of doing the father's/Father's will) the standard for "good," deceiving your "self," making your "self" "human resource" to be used (as "natural resource") for their pleasure and gain, joining them in hell, i.e., in the lake of fire that is never quenched.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world [the approval, i.e., affirmation of men, which is of the 'moment' only], and lose his own soul [which is eternal]?" Mark 8:36 "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6 "And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily [endure the rejection of men], and follow me [doing the Father's will]." Luke 9:23
"For if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ." Galatians 1:10
The father's/Father's authority vs. The carnal nature of the child.
Genesis 3:1-6 negating Hebrews 12:5-11 negating Romans 7:14-25
Immanuel Kant, Lawfulness Without Law
Making Law ever subject to 'change'
Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud
Dialogue - Opinion - Consensus - Affirmation - Group Dynamics
Psychology - Group Psychotherapy - facilitators of 'change'
Children of Disobedience
Higher Order Thinking Skills
The Child's Paradigm is 'Shifted' - Maslow, Rogers, Brown, Adorno, Kuhn
Vladimir Lenin, Bourgeoisie
Deductive - Inductive Reasoning
Rolls of J.L. Moreno: Work on a project which all can participate in - All can build relationship with one another while doing it - Individualism
Theory and practice
The Gospel Message
Individualism vs. Collectivism
Affirmation does not make you (or anyone else) righteous
Are you a Marxist?
"Rejoice, O young man, in thy youth; and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thine heart, and in the sight of thine eyes: but know thou, that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment." Ecclesiastes 11:9
"Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein. Also I set watchmen over you, saying, Hearken to the sound of the trumpet. But they said, We will not hearken." Jeremiah 6:16, 17
"And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them. And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour: the child shall behave himself proudly against the ancient, and the base against the honourable." "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:4-5, 12
"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine [Godly restraint]; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers [facilitators of 'change,' i.e., psychotherapists], having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables [unto their own imaginations]." 2 Timothy 4:3, 4
"And for this cause [because men 'justify' themselves, i.e., their love of the pleasures of the 'moment' more than God] God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie [that pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the Father's will]: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth [in the Father and in His Son, Jesus Christ], but had pleasure in unrighteousness [in their "self" and the pleasures of the 'moment,' which the world stimulates]." 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 12
"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. 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 recompence 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 1:21-32
© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2017