Monsters Among Us Hiding in Plain Sight
“Deductive Criminal Profiling: Comparing Applied Methodologies Between Inductive and Deductive Criminal Profiling Techniques”
________________________________________

The mental health community christened the first psychological “syndrome” in 1980, when Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) was officially recognized by inclusion in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III). Since that time, the investigative term “profile” has slowly become synonymous with the psychological term “syndrome” in the eyes of the legal community. The process of criminal profiling in its original form, as taught by Howard Teten and Pat Mullany at the FBI beginning in 1969, was completely different in origins and methodology from the construct of the psychological syndrome. With time, however, the two terms “profile” and “syndrome” have been wrongfully confederated because of the way some profiles are constructed, and the subsequent litigation [1], [2].
As the above infers, not all profiling methodology is the same, due largely to the fact that not all profilers are equally trained or able. In fact, this author will propose that there are essentially two very different types of profiling being done by criminal investigators and criminologists in the United States. The first profiling method will be termed Inductive Criminal Profiling, and is related conceptually to the construction of psychological syndromes and subsequent syndrome evidence. The second, less common, method of profiling will be termed Deductive Criminal Profiling. The purpose of this work is to overview the nature of Deductive Criminal Profiling, and demonstrate how its origins, assumptions, and methodology are fundamentally different from the origins, assumptions, and methodology of Inductive Criminal Profiling, and by inference syndrome evidence.
________________________________________

Inductive Criminal Profiling & Syndromes
For legal purposes, according to Moenssens et al [3], a syndrome or a profile is “a set of behavioral indicators forming a very characteristic pattern of actions or emotions that tend to point to a particular condition.” (note an emphasis on pointing to a condition, lending itself to purposes of treatment).
A more useful description comes from State of Oregon v. Lawson [4], where the defense tried to introduce expert testimony stating that their client, Mr. Lawson, did not match the profile of a sex offender, and by extension of that logic could not therefore be one. The court in that case found that “Whether it is labeled a ‘syndrome’ or a ‘profile’, the type of evidence…involves comparing an individual’s behavior with the behavior of others in similar circumstances who have been studied in the past.”
An Inductive Criminal Profile is one that is generalized to an individual criminal from initial behavioral and demographic characteristics shared by other criminals who have been studied in the past. It is the product of incomplete, statistical analysis and generalization (very often without comparison to norms), hence the descriptor Inductive. This author takes the descriptor from the phrase Inductive Statistics, which is the branch of statistics involving generalizations, predictions, estimations and decisions from data initially presented [5].

The datasets currently used to compile and statistically generalize Inductive Criminal Profiles are collected largely from three sources:
1. Formal and informal studies of known, incarcerated criminal populations, and the inherent clinical and non-clinical interviews upon which those studies are based.
2. Practical experience, from which isolated anecdotal data is recalled by the profiler; and
3. Public data sources, including the popular media (for example, the FBI readily admits that newspaper articles are collected by its personnel and used to fill out its computerized database of violent criminal offender activity in the United States).
Inductive Criminal Profiling: The process of profiling criminal behavior, crime scenes, and victims from the known behaviors and emotions suggested by other criminals, crime scenes, and/or victims.
In essence, as the term suggests, this is reasoning from initial statistical data to specific criminal offender behavior. In any event, Inductive Criminal Profiling is generally the result of some kind of statistical analysis, or finds it’s reasoning in cases outside of the case at hand.
Example of the logic: 80% of known serial killers that attack college students in parking lots are white males aged 20-35 who live with their mothers and drive Volkswagen Bugs– Our offender has attacked at least three female college students on separate occasions; our offender has attacked all three victims in parking lots.
Therefore, our offender, who is part of this large group who fit this “profile” called “serial killers” is a white male aged 20-35, lives with his mother, and drives a VW Bug.

The advantages of the Inductive Criminal Profiling model are readily apparent. Foremost is that Inductive Profiling is a very easy tool to use, for which no specialized forensic knowledge, education, or training in the study of criminal behavior or criminal investigation is required. Additionally, general profiles can be assembled in a relatively short period of time without any great effort or ability on the part of the profiler. The result is often a one- or two-page list of unqualified characteristics. These generalizations can accurately predict some of the non-distinguishing elements of individual criminal behavior, but not with a great deal of consistency or reliability.
There are currently several separate initiatives under way in both the United States and Canada to automate part or all this process with databasing tools and neural computer networks.
The major disadvantages of the Inductive Criminal Profiling model are equally apparent to the critical thinker. Firstly, the information itself is generalized from limited population samples, and not specifically related to any one case, therefore it is not by its nature intended for reconstructing a “profile” of an individual person. It is a generalized set of representations, averaged from a small group of individuals who may or may not have been appropriately sampled, depending on the knowledge and ability of the person collecting and assembling the data. Secondly, and perhaps most noted, is that Inductive profiles are generalized and averaged from the limited data collected only from known, apprehended offenders. An Inductive Criminal Profile does not fully or accurately consider current offenders who are at large, therefore it is by its very nature missing datasets from the most intelligent or skillful criminal populations; the criminals who are successful in continually avoiding detection by law enforcement. A third major disadvantage is that, as with any such generalization, an Inductive Criminal Profile is going to contain specific inaccuracies that can and have been used to implicate innocent individuals. This occurs when an Inductive Criminal Profile is used as some sort of infallible predictive measure by an unprofessional, trigger-happy profiler. Recent examples include the 1996 case of Richard Jewell in the “Olympic Park Bombing” and, also in 1996, the Colin Stagg profile debacle in Great Britain.

Assumptions of the Inductive Criminal Profiling model include:
• Small groups of known offenders, who commit the same types of crimes as unknown offenders, have commonly shared individual characteristics that can be accurately generalized back to initially similar individual unknown offenders.
• Offenders who have committed crimes in the past are culturally similar to current offenders, being influenced by at least similar environmental conditions and existing with the same general and sometimes specific motivations.
• Individual human behavior and characteristics can be generalized and even predicted from the initial statistical analysis of characteristics and behavior in very small samples.
• Behavior and motivation do not change within an individual over time, being static, predictable characteristics.
Inductive Profilers include the following groups of professionals, who have various backgrounds:
• FBI and ex-FBI profilers. Current FBI profiles are on average less than a page long and offer no explanation for the content of the profile. Most law enforcement agencies that this author has discussed the issue with have had little or no use for those types of profiles. Nor do most courtrooms.
• Forensic Psychologists and Forensic Psychiatrists, who rely solely on clinical personality measurements such as the MMPI, and the interview process, when formulating any kind of criminal personality profile.
• Many of the law enforcement profilers who have received FBI training, including Georgia Bureau of Investigation, ATF, and various state and local detectives.
• Criminologists: a criminologist is defined as someone who studies criminal behavior. It does not imply training, education, or experience. The term criminologist generally refers to someone who does scholarly, scientific and professional study concerning the etiology, prevention, control, and treatment of crime and delinquency, including the measurement and detection of crime, legislation, and the practice of criminal law, the law enforcement, judicial, and correctional systems. It is a category that, despite its ambitious definition, can include almost anyone in actual application.
The professional backgrounds of those listed does not necessarily include forensic training in criminal psychology, abnormal psychology, or psychopathology, and certainly does not imply any kind of experience with investigating violent serial criminals. For example, most people are not aware that FBI agents do not have jurisdiction at any homicide unless it occurs in a federal building or on an Indian Reservation, giving most FBI agents no applied experience investigating this type of crime whatsoever.
________________________________________
Deductive Criminal Profiling

A descriptive, applied definition of the Deductive Criminal Profiling model, according to this author, is: “The process of interpreting forensic evidence, including such inputs as crime scene photographs, autopsy reports, autopsy photographs, and a thorough study of individual offender victimology, to accurately reconstruct specific offender crime scene behavior patterns, and from those specific, individual patterns of behavior, deduce offender characteristics, demographics, emotions, and motivations.”
Note the heavy emphasis on an informed forensic reconstruction, and the exclusion of information from other similar offenders, or other similar offenses.
A Deductive Criminal Profile is one that is deduced from the careful forensic examination and behavioral reconstruction of a single offender’s crime scene(s). After the offender’s behaviors have been reconstructed, the crime scene characteristics are analyzed, and the victim characteristics are analyzed. From those combined characteristics, a profile with the characteristics of the individual who could have committed that specific offense(s), with that specific victim(s) under the conditions present at that specific crime scene(s) is deductively inferred. It is a forensically and behaviorally contained process. The process of deductive profiling is most appropriately termed Behavior Evidence Analysis, and depends on the analyst’s abilities to recognize patterns of behavior within a single offender to deduce meaning. Offender emotions during the offense, individual patterns of offense behavior, and offender personality characteristics are deduced from that particular offender’s crime scene behavior and victimology only.

Deductive Criminal Profiling: The Behavioral Evidence Analysis a specific criminal, crime scene(s), and victim(s) exclusively from forensic evidence relating to the crime scene(s) and victim(s) of that offender alone.
Example of the logic: The body of a female victim is found nude in a remote forest location with 4 shallow, careful incisions on the chest, cutting across the nipples. The victim’s genital areas have all been removed with a sharp instrument. Petechiae are evident in the eyes, neck and face above pattern compression on the neck. No blood is found at the crime scene. No clothes are found at the crime scene. The victim bears ligature furrows around her wrists with abraded contusions but no ligature is present. Fresh tire impressions are found in the mud approximately 20 yards from where the body is located.
Therefore, the offender in this particular offense bound the victim to restrain her while she was still alive indicated by the abrasions around the wrists associated with struggling. Our offender removed the ligature before disposing of the body, indicated by the fact that we didn’t find it at the scene. The victim was likely asphyxiated with a material ligature about the neck, indicated by the pattern compression and the petechiae. The location where the body was found is a disposal site and not the actual location of the offense indicated by the fact that no blood was present at this location. The offender has a vehicle consistent with the tire impressions and is mobile. All of these details together indicate a competent, intelligent offender who is likely able to sustain employment, and is very likely a sexual sadist. This is deductively suggested by the vehicle, the use of a secondary scene to dispose of the body to avoid transfer evidence, the removal of the victim’s genitals, and the deliberate cutting to the victim’s nipples intended to cause pain but not seriously injure.

The data used to infer a Deductive Criminal Profile for a particular criminal includes the following:
1. Forensic Evidence: A full equivocal forensic analysis must be performed before profiling can begin, to ensure the integrity of the behavior and the crime scene characteristics that are to be analyzed. Nothing can be assumed by the profiler.
2. Crime Scene Characteristics: Crime scene characteristics are determined from all forensic reports, all forensic analysis, and all forensic documentation which provides the nature of the interaction between the victim(s), the offender, and the location(s) of the offense during the occasion of a specific offense. In cases involving a related series of offenses, such as in serial rape, or serial homicide, crime scene characteristics are determined individually and analyzed as they evolve, or fail to evolve, over time. An offender’s crime scene characteristics, in a single offense or over multiple offenses, can lend themselves to inferences about offender motive, modus operandi, and the determination of crime scene signature.
3. Victimology: Victimology is the thorough study and analysis of victim characteristics. The characteristics of an individual offender’s victim population of choice, in a single offense or over time, can lend themselves to deductive inferences about offender motive, modus operandi, and the determination of crime scene signature. In Deductive Profiling, almost as much time is spent profiling each victim as the offender responsible for the crime(s).
The Advantages of the Deductive Criminal Profiling
The advantages of the Deductive Criminal Profiling model are very important. This model requires specialized education and training in forensic science, crime scene reconstruction, and wound pattern analysis. Because of this requisite specialized knowledge, Deductive Criminal Profiles tend to be more specific than Inductive Criminal Profiles, assisting greatly in the major goal of the profiling process, which is to move from a universal set of suspect characteristics to a more unique set of suspect characteristics.

Deductive Criminal Profiling is also useful for thoroughly establishing Modus Operandi behavior, as well as offender signature behavior, which assists in the linkage of seemingly unrelated crimes. According to Geberth [6], the Modus Operandi, or MO behavior, or method of operation, is a dynamic, learned behavior, changing over time, as the offender becomes more experienced. It involves only those actions that are necessary to commit the offense.
Signature behavior, or the signature aspect of criminal behavior, as Geberth [7] defines it, is comprised of those behaviors not required to commit the offense. Signature is comprised of significant personality identifiers that distinguish the nature of the offender’s crime scene methodology.
These significant and highly individualized personality identifiers are evident in such things as:
• When an offender repeatedly engages in a specific order of sexual activity;
• When an offender repeatedly uses a specific type of binding;
• When an offender inflicts similar types of injuries to different victims;
• When an offender displays the body in a certain manner for shock value;
• When an offender tortures and/or mutilates his victims, and/or engages in some other form of specific ritualistic behavior.

Another very tangible advantage of the Deductive Criminal Profiling method is that, because it so thoroughly explores victimology, and the nature of the interaction between the victim(s), the crime scene(s), and the offender, it can very pointedly demonstrate an individual offender’s motivations in even the most bizarre or seemingly senseless offenses. As Geberth insightfully reminds us in his foundational work Practical Homicide Investigation, 3rd. Ed., “No one acts without motivation.” Deductive Criminal Profiling techniques explore offender actions through the physical evidence, through the victimology, and through the crime scene as the primary behavioral and motivational documentation, and illuminate that particular offender’s motivation. The whole profile is logic statement, based solidly on the arguments made through an analysis of behavior patterns.
Also, due to this same thoroughness, learned or experiential generalizations can be kept from obscuring or misleading investigations. Investigators with a lot of years on the job, or a lot of experience investigating a particular type of crime, tend to formulate theories about a case early on. Instead of investigating the case, they may instead spend their efforts attempting to prove a theory. Deductive Criminal Profiling precludes theory generation, and subsequent bruised egos, until a full investigative analysis has been done.
The final major advantage of the Deductive Criminal Profiling method is that it examines behaviors of individual offenders as they occur over time. Change and growth are allowed for, analyzed, and recompiled back into the criminal profile. As something like offender MO behavior or motivations change or evolve over the course of multiple offenses in an offender’s career, it is noticed and it used to better understand the offender.
The disadvantages of Deductive Criminal Profiling are somewhat few, but well worth noting. First is that it is not a quick fix or a cure all; it requires a great deal of effort and multi-disciplinary skill on the part of each member of the investigative team. Second, because it is such an intensive process, it can be extremely emotionally exhausting. Investigators that learn to use these techniques should take care to be emotionally grounded individuals and not be afraid to discuss any emotional difficulties with those close to them. And third, a Deductive Criminal Profile cannot not point out a specific known individual and say with confidence that they are likely responsible for a certain crime or series of crimes unless that offender’s unique signature is known and established.

Assumptions of the Deductive Criminal Profiling method include:
• No offender acts without motivation.
• Every single offense should be investigated as its own unique behavioral and motivational existent. Given the nature of human behavior, no two cases are really
ever alike.
• Some offenders have unique motivations and/or behaviors that should be individuated from other similar offenders.
• All human behavior develops uniquely, over time, in response to environmental and biological factors.
• Criminal MO behavior can evolve over time and over the commission of multiple offenses.
• A single offender is capable of multiple motives over the commission of multiple offenses, or even during the commission of a single offense.
• Statistical generalizations and experiential theorizing, while sometimes helpful, are incomplete and can ultimately mislead an investigation, and encourage investigative laziness. When we think that we have all of the answers in a case, not only might we only collect evidence that fits those answers, we might think that a thorough investigation is no longer requisite at all.
________________________________________

Conclusions
The Inductive Profiling model, due largely to the lack of uniform training and education on the part of those who use it, has proven time and time again to be an unreliable source of investigative guidance. No standard terminology exists to describe offender behavior, and no classifications that have been developed have been rigorously validated, such as the crime scene classification efforts in the Crime Classification Manual [8]. Furthermore, those classifications have been developed using the same structure and philosophy as the DSM, despite the intention that the DSM be used for the purposes of treatment, and not being designed for the purposes of criminal investigation. The adoption of this clinical model, then, serves no other real purpose than to lend pseudo-clinical credibility to the classification. The model arguably does not serve the purpose that it was designed for.
Furthermore, initial statistical analysis based on unproven classifications and non-uniform terminology are no replacement for a thorough forensic reconstruction, crime scene analysis, and victimological assessment in either a criminal investigation or in a court of law. Given this fact, and given the extensive liability of police departments in high profile cases involving overzealous investigators armed with Inductive Profile evidence, and the general inadmissibility of Inductive “Profile” evidence in a court of law, the practice of teaching investigators purely Inductive Profiling methods should end.
The multi-disciplinary Deductive Profiling method, though more time consuming in the investigative end, will prove to be more effective because of its usefulness as an investigative guide, its competency at linking crimes, and because of its very high probative value in terms of thoroughly establishing signature and motivation. In short, the Deductive Profiling method encourages deliberation, competency, thoroughness, and requires a high degree of intra- and extra-departmental cohesiveness and communication. The Inductive Profiling method encourages egocentricity, investigative short-cuts, and has been used in the past to replace a competent forensic investigation into fact. In the past, when this author has attempted to explain the Deductive Profiling process to individuals involved in criminal investigations, those investigators have said, “It sounds like you’re trying to trick us into doing more work.” To which this author has always responded, “You’re right.”
________________________________________
ENDNOTES
1. United States v. Banks, 1988
2. United States v. Sokolow, 1989
3. Moenssens, A., Starrs, J., Henderson, C., & Inbau, F., Scientific Evidence in Civil and Criminal Cases, 4th Ed., (New York: Foundation Press, 1995), pp.1146-1147
4. State of Oregon v. Lawson, 1994
5. The American Heritage Dictionary, 2nd Ed., (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1982)
6. Geberth, Vernon “The Signature Aspect in Criminal Investigation,” Law and Order, November, 1995, pp.45-49
7. Ibid.
8. Burgess, A. G., Burgess, A. W., Douglas, J., Ressler, R. Crime Classification Manual, Reprint Ed., (New York: Lexington Books, 1992) pp. 21-22
________________________________________

Criminological Theories and Their Application

Introduction
Criminology is a knowledge body that treats crimes as a social phenomenon. Criminological theories are important in understanding criminality. The latter term encompasses all the issues that involve law breaking, law making and reactions towards the process of breaking these laws. There is a unified sequence that is created by the latter mentioned processes. Criminology may also be defined as the process of studying the etiology, nature and extent of law-breaking behavior. Given all the latter issues, then criminology covers all the societal arrangements, group roles, structural issues in society and other dynamics affecting the group.

History and definition of criminology theories
Classical and choice theories
This school of thought began as early as the eighteenth century. One of the most notable figures associated with the classical schools at that time was Cesare Beccaria. His work and the work of many other criminologists influenced the criminal justice systems as we know it today. Classical theories were set aside for some years but this was later changed after the neo-classical movement began back in the nineteen eighties. At this point, criminologists began adopting positivism in their explanations while others also began embracing structural influences.
There are three main ideas that govern the classical school of thought and they are as follows.
• People’s freedom to choose.
• The ability to control choice.
• Certainty, swiftness, and severity of punishment
The first aspect listed above is because all human beings have the ability to make choices about their lives. This means that they have the free will to become greedy, jealous, thrill seekers, vain, lustful, needy, angry, vengeful etc. Consequently, most of the latter behaviors are mere indications of free will among these persons. (Siegel, 2004).

Secondly, the classical theory is founded upon the premise that all can control those choices. In other words, when individuals fear the risk of punishment, then they are likely to control their criminal tendencies. Human beings can analyze situations about their positive outcomes and their potential negatives. If the risks involved in engaging in certain behavior are much less than the benefits, then an individual is likely to commit that crime.
Thirdly, the classical school of thought is founded on the swiftness severity and certainty of punishment. According to these thinkers, when the latter features are present within any society, then potential criminals are likely to be deterred from proceeding with their criminal intentions. In cases where punishment is conducted fairly, then this is likely to reinforce the latter belief about crime. One can regard punishment as an incentive for obeying the law. Consequently, if it is administered rationally and legitimately, then it can deter crime. (Cook, 2005)
All in all, the interpretation of these three core ideas has brought about different reactions and different results especially when applied to case studies. Consequently, it is important for one to appreciate the context of a particular issue in order to understand crime. In this regard, a number of choice theories exist in the field of criminology. For instance, some people utilize the rational choice theory as a basis for understanding crime. Some prefer using the situational crime prevention theory, the sanctions theory and the deterrence theories all qualify as forms of the classical thought. In the above, the routine activities theory is founded upon the belief that for crime to occur, there must be three aspects that include a suitable target, a potential offender and an absent or incapable guardian.
In the classical school of thought, individuals must be motivated to commit crimes through the availability of an opportunity. In practice, classical theories are important in understanding victimization as well. Demographics and lifestyle are important predictors of victimization (the process by which victims and offenders get in contact with one another). Many researchers have found that aspects such as being male, unmarried, leading an active lifestyle and using bars can have an important influence on the occurrence of crime. It should be noted however, that the classical school of thought is not founded entirely on demographic factors, as these are the important predictors of the occurrence of crime. While some of the latter may not qualify as fully fledged theories, they are still as important as the full theories in understanding crime. (Pearce, 2003).

The Rational Choice Theory
The rational choice theory is founded upon the premise that criminals have the ability to use intelligent thought while committing crimes. In other words, social behavior is an aggregation of a series of behavioral actions that are affected and conducted by rational individuals. This means that potential criminals are actors that are affected by certain values and beliefs within society. Also, these actors usually calculate the benefits or the costs of taking a certain action and then make the decision to commit that act if they are likely to maximize its benefits or its overall utility process. In the rational choice theory, one must also consider the effect that one’s environment has upon their decisions making process.
Here, there is an assumption that all criminals are aware of their value systems and the means required to pursue these courses of action. Consequently, it is necessary for actors or potential criminals to first collect, then organize and finally analyze this information to come up with the most feasible alternatives. The rational choice theory is founded upon the ends and means concept. In other words, the latter theory provides an avenue for describing how criminals are able to achieve certain ends through the means of rational calculus.
It should also be noted that the rational choice theory refers to methodological individualism. In order words, individuals must examine the options available to them. This process of rational thought is what is then translated into the entire society. Consequently, the theory is built up from the individual and then aggregated to the entire society. The rational choice theory presents researchers with a series of challenges. The first is that most of the variables found within this theory are difficult to quantify. One such example is a ‘potential criminal’. This variable is based on the aspect of criminality which is a personality trait yet crime itself is an event. The suitability of targets is yet another difficult term to define because most criminals portray this aspect differently depending on the demographics and their environment.
Other criminologists assert that the theory is best for preventative techniques. This is because it assists in explaining the following three d’s of crime.
• Detect
• Delay
• Deter
When one is interested in finding out details about the exact location of where crime was committed, then it may be increasingly difficult. Additionally, it is also very difficult to understand exactly when a crime had occurred. The aspect of a crime’s conditions can also be difficult to determine through the rational choice theory. (Schmalleger, 2005)
Other experts have also asserted that the rational choice theory may not be suitable in explaining criminal actions because it is more suitable in confirming that an action was committed rather than falsifying it. These critics also claim that the magnitude of effects of the theories’ variables are not well specified. This goes hand in hand with the overdependence on variables that cannot be observed or even measured. Lastly, critics claim that the theory is not particularly useful because it is a post hoc theory type.

The classical school of thought has been very influential in the criminal justice system as some of the policies affecting offenders are founded upon them. Examples of such policies include the get-tough policy, police saturation measures and police crackdown in potential crime zones. Deterrence strategies are largely based on this notion and so are embarrassment rituals conducted upon offenders. (Pearce, 2003)
It should be noted that the choice theory renounces and firmly criticizes the use of rehabilitation as a form of law enforcement. These theorists believe that certain criminals are quite cold and hard such that it would be a waste of resources and time to try and rehabilitate them. Adherents to this principle are likely to understand that the only way to deal with crime is by separating innocent persons from evil ones.

Strain theory
The strain theory is since certain social structures force individuals to commit crime. Strain theories were originally stated by well renowned criminologist Emile Durkheim. Thereafter, they were advanced by Robert Merton in the nineteen thirties who was then followed by Cohen in the mid nineteen fifties. Cloward and Ohlin did some more work on the theory and their efforts were subsequently backed by Rosenfeld and Messner.
According to these theories, strain may either be brought on by the structural institutions. The latter refer to societal level processes that are eventually transmitted down to the actors that make up society. Subsequently, most of them begin perceiving needs based on these structural institutions. A criminal’s perceptions about their opportunities or threats are defined by the level of regulation or circulation of a certain social structure.
The strain theory is also founded upon the premise that an individual is the person who has to undergo a lot of friction and difficulties in trying to meet society’s goals or expectations. Sometimes when these expectations are so important to the individual, then he or she might consider achieving through any route possible without serious consideration of the legitimacy of the means required to achieve it.

In Durkheim’s anomie concept, he tried to explain why certain individuals may choose to commit suicide. In his book, Durkheim states that this occurs when individuals lose their sense of purpose or when they feel sidelined by society. Additionally, this feeling is normally coupled by the lack of values in an individual.
Dubois also did some independent work on the strain theory and found that most people commit crimes as a result of the strain experienced within their environment. He confirmed this through a study of African American crime in the late nineteenth century. At that time, the society had just undergone radical changes in the political system thus heightening the level of expectations amongst this group. Most of them were strained by these and thus found themselves committing crimes to achieve their means. (Schmalleger, 2005) It should also be noted that the strain theory can be analyzed through the functional aspect or through the structural aspect. In the structural aspect, there is more emphasis on the way things work; here one examines the nature of a criminal event or the process of committing the criminal action with a look of the connections between these aspects and their level of interdependence of these variables. On the other hand, the functional explanation is founded upon the premise that certain structural features are parts of an overall system. This is the reason why things occur in the manner that they do. Social systems are mostly founded on the parts that make them up and when one part fails to perform these functions, then it subsequently leads to strain. If this strain continues for a long time, then chances are that the entire system could fail. Robert Merton was very influential in the theory because he provided an avenue for understanding crime through strain. Merton asserted that there are two major pathways within which individuals can be led to crime. The first is a culturally related expectation and the structural possibilities required to achieve this goal. Merton’s study was conducted at a time when people were moving to the United States in pursuance of the American dream. According to this author, many of them found that it was not as easy as they had thought. Merton claimed that there was a disconnection between the culturally related expectations and the socially acceptable methods of achieving it. This disconnect was what was called the anomie. He believed that certain individuals chose to engage in criminal behavior because of the strain created between their aspirations and the opportunities available or meeting these expectations. This is the reason why more crime is prevalent in the lower social classes than in the higher ones because many people lack the opportunities with which to achieve societal goals and they eventually choose to commit it through illegitimate reasons. (Pearce, 2003).

Usually, such persons may lose their sense of motivation and may get frustrated. Also, society creates a situation of anomie when it dwells too much on the winners rather than rewarding all people who had the courage to compete. What this creates is a situation in which members of society has no clear-cut methodology or predictability that can be used to define success and this is what is regarded as anomie or a degree of cultural chaos.

Cultural deviance theory
One of the pioneers who was very instrumental in the process in explain the cultural deviance theory was Albert Cohen. The latter criminologist concentrated on delinquent behavior among boys within eth London society. Through this study, he was able to come up with the delinquent subculture phenomenon. His major concern in the theory was the aspect of innovative adaptation. According to him, young people do not operate in isolation as most of them are influenced by the world around them. Consequently, by identifying and understanding the characteristic of these cultures, it is possible to remember the way one has to deal with certain issues.
The first aspect of a delinquent subculture is the non-utilitarianism aspect of it. In this regard, juvenile delinquents take part in crime just so that they can enjoy themselves or so that they can have fun. Additionally, the delinquent subculture is characterized by a level of maliciousness where such groups just want to cause trouble. Besides these, many delinquent subcultures have a lot of negativisms. In other words, they tend to negate the norms of other cultures such as the middle class and then perceive this defiance as normal. Delinquent subcultures are also characterized by the presence of hedonism as a need for immediate self-gratification. Group autonomy also plays an important part here because most of these delinquents usually regard the authority of the groups as the only one and any other source is defied. (Schmalleger, 2005) It is also important to note that Cohen felt that the delinquent boys were frustrated with the values of the middle class and consequently, rebelled against these sentiments through the use of crime. Walter Miller on the other hand focused on another approach to cultural deviant theory. He did most of his research among lower class males in Boston. According to this author, delinquent behavior was not bought by another class’s values; instead, he saw it as a reflection of the lower-class culture. He believed that middle class values were overestimated in Cohen’s theory. He also asserted that within the middle class, certain values were regarded as more important than others. However, the lower class was governed by different standards. In the end, this brings about clashes between these two groups and may create conflicts between the two categories or classes. In the lower class, values revolve around survival. Consequently, in the process of achieving these values, young males find that they have to engage in criminal behavior in order to achieve them.

Social process theories
In the social process, theory, more emphasis is placed on the micro level aspects than the macro one. This is different form all the latter mentioned theories because here, focus is on the role that the individual plays and how this affects society and not vice versa. One of the social process theories is the Sutherland’s Differential Associations theory. In this theory, learning is assumed to take place as a result of the process of socialization. In other words, individuals have the choice to either accept social norms or to reject them. This is different from the former mentioned theories (structural theories) that center on society’s ability to impose its norms and value upon others without due consideration of their preferences. (Pearce, 2003)
Another distinct feature that emerges in the social process theories is the fact that criminal activities can take part in all social classes and there is little emphasis on one group. Another social process theory that one must consider is the social control theory. Through this theory, one can understand the fact that crime can be imposed through eth process of controlled existence. In the containment theory it is assumed that no single individual is forced to commit crime and that it can be committed by anyone. In the labeling theory, individuals are pushed into committing more crimes when they have been labeled as criminals by society itself.
Another social process theory is the social developmental theory. Here, an individual is part of their interaction with their respective environments and this can only be understand by incorporating all the biological, psychological and sociological factors that come into play within an individual’s life. In the age graded theory, it is asserted that crime is likely to occur when there is a change that has occurred at a certain age within a person’s life. The individual responds to this abnormality through criminal behavior. Lastly, the dual taxonomic theory revolves around the fact that certain neuropsychological factors can make one more predisposed to crime. In this theory, considerations are also given to other causative factors such as poverty as drivers for the occurrence of crime. (Cook, 2005)
All in all, it should be noted that most crimes usually occur because of the specific choices that individuals have to make in the process of either accepting or rejecting societal norm.

Marxist criminology
The Marxist school of thought revolves around the reasons behind change. Additionally, it also dwells on the identification of disruptive forces in any one society. Additionally, it looks for ways in which any given society is divided along forces of wealth, power and also through prestige. Through these mechanisms, it is possible to understand why certain individuals behave the way they do. In Marxist criminology, a lot of consideration is given to the relationships between crime and society i.e. there is a need to look into the structural and immediate social environments that could propagate crime. In this regard, Karl Marx believed that the upper class utilized the law to impose their own rules upon the lower class so that they could stay in those disadvantaged positions. Here, one can understand why certain acts are labeled as crimes and why others are not. This means that the theory is best for understanding state corporate crimes, state crime and political crime.
While the relevance of the Marxist school of thought has reduced over the past decades, one cannot undermine the influence that this theory has upon the field of criminology. In Marxist criminology it is assumed that economic power can be translated into another form of power i.e. political power. Through economic power, the majority members of society i.e. those who do not have economic power are disempowered and causes discourse. (Schmalleger, 2005)
In Marxism, conformity is created through socialization. Conformity is an important part of a society because it ensures social order. Here, law is the methodology utilized to enforce the state’s interests. In other words, since all states operate under their own rules, then it is very possible to impose any kind of rules. It should be noted here that small groups always come out as leaders regardless of whether the system if governance is democratic or autocratic. The reason behind the emergence of groups in any given society is that there is a need for decision making organs everywhere. Consequently, society is forced to contend with the influences made by this ruling class. In other words, the modern state is largely driven and affected by those who control the means of production. Examples of how this can be depicted in colonial law in colonial states such as East Africa. The British created laws that would assist them in the process of securing returns from coffee plantains. Property laws are usually created in such a manner that they would benefit the ruling class, these laws sideline the lower class and they are forced to look for other means of survival other than through the process of understanding these underlying issues. Most of them resort to crime as their last alternative to survival. Adherents to this theory compare two continents i.e. Europe and North America. They claim that in Europe, the law is more socialistic and this is why crime rates are quite low. However, in the US, crime rates have hit all-time highs because of the lack of effective mechanisms that would assist in the process of understanding this problem. The Marxist school of thought centers around the issue of social isolation. Consequently, it has also been used to understand why certain crimes work related crimes occur. When society offers certain individual work that is regarded as demeaning or work that involves no application of creativity or decisions making, then individuals are bound to get bored by it. In the end, some working class members opt to engage in corporate crime in order to defy this kind of oppression within the workplace.

Application of the theories to case studies
The case of the wall street broker
The classical theories can be applied to this situation in order to understand the latter issue. This wall street broker examined the costs of doing insider trading (i.e. engaging in unethical behavior, getting disbarred or being arrested) against the benefits that would emanate from committing the crime. The benefit would be five million dollars in a very short period. Additionally, punishment is not certain because if executed well, corporate crime is difficult to detect. Since punishment was not certain, then this could have propagated the individual in committing the crime. (Schmalleger, 2005).
The strain theory is also very important in understanding this broker’s decisions to commit corporate crime. This individual lives in a society that values winners or people who seem monetarily successful. It is likely that the legal channels for attaining high level of financial success are minimal as they may take too long. Consequently, there was an anomie in meeting societal expectations related to financial success and the legal channels available to achieve this. In the end, he chose to use a short cut to meet these expectations. The cultural deviant theory states that individuals are likely to engage in certain forms of behavior because there are certain norms that society creates with regard to the middle class. Consequently, to defy these norms, then one is likely to engage in criminal behavior. The stockbroker was rebelling against society’s expectations of him. Social processes theories focus on the stockbroker’s ability to decide for himself why he wants to commit a certain crime. The control theory can be applied here in that society’s expectations of monetary gain were able to control his actions and caused him to commit a crime. (Schmalleger, 2005) In the Marxist school of thought, individuals commit crime because they are trying to respond to the demeaning work or the type of work that involves minimal creativity. This theory could be the strongest in trying to understand why this crime occurred. The stock broker could be committing the crime as a way of defying the oppressive nature of his job even after he received qualifications from one of the most reputable learning institutions in the world.

The suburban college girl
The classical choice theories focus on the benefits that one stands to gain against the costs or negatives that they must incur. In this case, the college girl wanted to complete her education and pass; these were the benefits of the crime. On the other hand, the deterrents would be the fact that she can be rejected as a decent member of society. Since the punishment in this case was not that severe, then this could have pushed her there.
The strain theory also assists in understanding her situation. Society expects her to complete her education to get a good job and live comfortably. In order to do this, she must pay her tuition and look for time to read her books. Since the benefits are at stake, then she risks being labeled as an outcast just so that she can meet this expectation. The strain between these two aspects caused her to commit the social misdeed of becoming a call girl.
The cultural deviant theory can also be applied in this situation. The call girls come from a middle class family, but she chooses to rebel against the expectation of this class by engaging in socially unacceptable behavior. This rebellion is propagated by the fact that she cannot meet the expectation of society through the available channels so she decided to rebel by looking for others. (Cook, 2005)
Social process theories also apply to her scenario in that she can decide for herself whether she wants to commit a crime and why she chose this avenue to do so. Marxist criminology can also be applied here because the controllers of capital have provided this girl with very limited routes to meet her obligations. To survive she has to resort to socially inappropriate means such as through the call girl service in order to make it. The most applicable theory in this case study is the strain theory.

The Hispanic boy

The classical school of thought would explain this boy’s decisions to join a gang though the aspect of punishment. In such a neighborhood, law enforcement authorities are not that vigilant, consequently, punishment is not certain, it may be delayed or might not be that severe. The benefits of joining the gang in clued protecting his life and getting money. Sine this boy has very few options that could assist him in meeting hi basic needs, then he weighs the benefits against the deterrents and finds that committing these gang crimes would be more beneficial to him. In close relation to this theory is the strain theory. There is anomie between meeting his basic needs such as food, clothing and the means available to get them. The Hispanic boy probably has little access to education thus making it extremely difficult for him to pursue his dreams through the legal channels. The anomie between these structural aspects cases him to commit crimes.
The cultural deviance theory is the most applicable in this case study because the Hispanic boy could be acting out against the rules of the middle class; that one has to get wealth through certain channels such as working or education. In close relation to this are the social process theories where neutralization theory would be most applicable Marxist theory also applies in this situation because the controllers of wealth have created a situation where this boy has no other mechanism for earning a living since the former groups have limited his choices.

Male college student
Date rape can be explained through the classical theory in that this individual chose to engage in it because there are minimal chances of getting caught if it is covered against the background of a date. He chooses to engage in the act because he may not want to undergo the long process of normal intercourse. The benefits outweigh the punishment and thus prompt him to continue with it. The strain theory explains that society expects certain things from individuals. In this case, one is expected to engage in intercourse only through consent from both parties. However, to do this, the college student may be required to spend a lot of time on a certain lady. Consequently, there is a strain and he chooses to rape such victims to respond to this strain. (Schmalleger, 2005)
The cultural deviant theory may also be applicable in that he may be acting to his peer’s delinquent behavior. These peers may be acting out against their own class through date rape. The social process there is applicable in that the control theory helps to understand this college student’s behavior. Lastly, Marxism is also applicable here because he might be trying to depict sign of power among his partners. But to do that, one has to have status which is only applicable to controllers of capital. In reaction to this situation, he chooses to rebel through date rape.

Conclusion
Criminological theories are all applicable in the latter case sties. However, certain theories seem to stand out against others thus making it relatively easy to deal with the root causes of the crimes through those outstanding ones.
Reference
Siegel, L. (2004): Criminological theories, patterns and typologies, CA, Wadsworth Publishing Company
Pearce, F. (2003): Crimes of the powerful, Peter Lang Publishing company
Cook, D. (2005): Social process theories vs social structural theories, Routledge
Schmalleger, F. (2005): Criminology Today- an integrative approach; McGraw hill publishers

Violent Attachments-Terrorism
Introduction.

In this teaching we’re going to talk about the Making of a Terrorist. Why does terrorism exist? Who are the terrorists? What are the origins of terrorism? What are the psychological components of terrorism? What are the social implications and constructs of terrorism? I have created several courses for different universities on terrorism and the profiling of these types of violence.
Terrorism is not easily defined within social and political contacts. You can have different meanings in different periods of time and have a different purpose even within the same period of time. For this reason, there is no primary definition or single definition that will be successful in determining what is Terrorism. Also, we were looking at the hypocrisy that is concerning the definition of terrorism. Today’s freedom fighter might become tomorrow’s terrorist depending on who’s doing the definition.
Many groups can fall into the category of being labeled as terrorists. We are look through the history of the world and we have seen that once again it is who is defining what is terrorism.

Social Underpinnings
In this section we are going to be looking at the regions terrorists and counterterrorist need to justify the violence. We are going to summarize some studies the way violence is justified. And we are going to describe three different views of profiling in this debate. And we are going to be outlining different points of view regarding radicalization and alienation.
We must remember that social processes influence individual psychological interpretation of how they are responding to and reacting to their psychological and social logical motivators. Violent religious groups and their organizations are rooted in ways of how they view reality. Either lone terrorists or terrorists who belong to organizations take predictable actions and serve certain functions within their groups.

Anthropological and Sociological Approaches
 Two primary factors account for the continued influence of religion:
 First, religion has always been an important influence in the history of humanity.
 Second, modernization tends to break down communities, families, and social orientation.

Terrorism as a Religious Process.
 Strong religious beliefs increase:
 The likelihood of religious conflict.
 The intensity of fighting.
 Violence results when sacred traditions are threatened.
 Eschatology plays a major role:
 Messianic warriors in the end-time correct the heresies of the past and fight for the ideal divine order of a deity.
 Empirical findings demonstrate that terrorism is partially a religious process.

Lone Wolf

 Religion helps to produce the “lone-wolf avenger”:
 A person who has a particular ideology but isn’t part of a group.
 An individual lone-wolf avenger needs to find some type of justification for his or her actions, and religion provides the perfect path.

Terrorism as a Religious Process.

 Despite utilization of sacred stories and cosmic mythologies, there is a very limited official religious basis for terrorism.
 Religious terrorists are lethal – religious terrorist groups killed more people with fewer attacks than secular terrorists.
 Religious terrorists are deadlier than their secular counterparts.

Criminology

 Criminology as applied to terrorism looks at prevention and apprehension.
 Terrorists commit crimes as they struggle for a cause; they set them apart from ordinary street criminals.
 As first responders, law enforcement personnel must recognize the differences between typical criminal behavior and terrorist activity.

Practical Behavioral Differences.

Terrorists

1. Focus their actions toward a
goal
2. Are dedicated to a cause.
3. Rarely cooperate with officials because they do not wish to betray their cause.
4. Tend to attack
5. Strike against targets after careful planning
6. Prepare for and rehearse their operations

Criminals

1. Are unfocused.
2. Are not devoted to crime as a philosophy.
3. Will make deals to avoid punishment.
4. Usually run when confronted with force.
5. Strike when the opportunity to do so is present.
6. Rarely train for crime

Justifying Terrorism

 Deadly force demands the greatest amount of justification.
 Terrorists have the same need for social approval, but they rarely obtain it because their actions are not sanctioned by the governments, they attack.
 Terrorists must look outside normative social channels to gain approval for their acts.
 In order for social acceptance to be gained, the terrorist group must be isolated from mainstream society.
 Processes used by American criminal gangs and suicide bombers are the same.

Profiling the Terrorist Personality

 Research lists four types of personalities:
 Revolutionaries drawn to a cause.
 People who wander among terrorist groups,
 People who have a sudden conversion experience
 People who are attracted by peers.

Paths and Routes for Terrorism

 The psychological processes that lead people to terrorist groups.
 The issues that keep them in the group.
 The support for people who want to leave.

Radicalization & Alienation.

 As with other areas of terrorism, the areas of radicalization and alienation are fraught with differing views and suggestions for research.
 Researchers will obtain more fruitful results by examining militant ideology and finding the concepts that are shown to attract followers.
Racialization

Radicalization is a six-step framework.
 Alienated young man.
 Meets other alienated young men and form bond.
 Groups gravitate toward religion.
 Religion interpreted in militant terms.
 Militant group meets terrorist contact.
 Militants join terrorists as a group decision.

Groups in Prison

 Recent reports suggest that groups are being radicalized in prison.
 A leader often targets selected prisoners or dominate new inmates using intimidation to force intimidating them until they join the group.
 Research maintains recruitment is like procedures used by street gangs.

Conclusion.
There are many reasons why people on the fringes of society decide to strike out and either act out on the own or join terrorists’ groups. In any event we have see that there have and endorse violent attachments to carry out their plans of evil and vengeance.

Sins of the Fathers-Sins of the Children
Collective Trauma.

Do not bow in worship to them, and do not serve them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, allowing the consequences of the fathers’ iniquity on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate (reject) me. Exodus 20:5

Introduction
The above mentioned, scripture is a powerful example of how parents for one reason or another, do not come to the Lord Jesus Christ and their mindsets and lifestyles fall upon their children and grandchildren onto the third and fourth generation. This is a perfect example of Lifespan development. Lifespan development basically means that the life course for a person is developed and solidified through different life experiences.
We can see that Father God identifies that idolatry is a powerful tool of the enemy to distract us from giving of ourselves to the living God. Idolatry can be anything or anyone we place before our obedience to Father God. Parents who neglect their spiritual covering of their children leave the door open for their children to make the same mistakes in their lives. Godless parents mean chaos for themselves and their families. Satan wreaks havoc in the lives of everyone through generational rebellion. And the dysfunctional and sinful lifestyle carry over from one generation to another. We must understand that the cycle can be broken through the Lord Jesus Christ as it states in Colossians, 1:13-14. “Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: in whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins.” There’s nothing impossible for God. As we surrender to him, we can be healed of anything that we have gone through and generational chains can be broken. My wife and I have an on-going counseling ministry of working with people who have suffered trauma.

What is Collective Trauma
Trauma does not take place just with one individual, but there are many who are involved in this interaction of pain and injury. It can be physical, emotional, psychological, and even spiritual. Trauma is that event either one time or ongoing experience with a significant impact on one’s survival.
Idolatry is a powerful tool of the enemy to distract us from giving of ourselves to the living God. Idolatry can be anything or anyone we place before our obedience to Father God. As a psychologist, I have seen many people who have gone through many terrible different situations in their lives, and as we surrender to the Lord Jesus Christ, we can overcome them. God has promised us victory. But the victory comes through the redemption of the Lord Jesus Christ. This redemptive work only becomes a reality when we believe it, accept it, and apply it to our lives.

There is a Type 1. Trauma which states that the person experienced a traumatic event in their lives only once. The second is Type 2 Trauma whereby the individual has experienced time and again trauma. Many people have experienced trauma for many years from both primary (parents) and secondary agents (extended family, school, etc.) of socialization. I try to help victims of generational trauma that their parents or other caretakers experienced their own trauma and just carried out the pain and suffering they experienced growing up on others. There is an underlying sense of FEAR if they speak of their trauma whatever it may be what consequences they or their families might suffer. How will others look at them if they share their deep secrets. Will they take away my children? Will I be labeled a as bad person, mother, father, etc.

Failure to Recognize Trauma
When trauma is not recognized, or validated by the family or community, to which one is part of, there is a response that there might be something wrong with him, and everybody else is sane. When trauma is experienced on an ongoing basis, this can’t convert into PTSD, and there are many symptoms of PTSD, which range from hyper villages or arousal, severe anxiety, agitation, irritability, depression, hostility, distrust, fear, poor impulse control, self-destructive behaviors, self-medication, nightmares, etc.
Discuss on my PhD dissertation of the ‘Association of PTSD and Child Abuse in the El Salvadorean Population”.

Victim Blaming
Victim Blaming- Lays the responsibility for the offense committed against them on the victim, instead of the offender.
• Need to assure victims that they are not alone.
• Guard against “blaming the victim.”

Response to Traumatic Events
Our mind is very powerful, and when trauma occurs, automatic signs begin to arise within us, and it may cause fear or aggression, resorting to flight or fight. Murder, rape, physical abuse, sexual abuse, domestic violence, psychological and emotional abuse.
Some people when they are experiencing trauma, and their instinct is to freeze. They freeze because they’re unable to gauge or measure or understand how to defend themselves against violence, and or evil.
• Acute stress experienced in the immediate aftermath of a traumatic event.
• Anxiety, dissociate symptoms, and other manifestations that occur within one month after exposure to trauma.
• Symptoms include victim’s re-experiencing of the traumatic event, avoidance of stimuli associated with the event, numbing of general responsiveness, and
increased agitation.
• Victims may suffer wide variety of mental disorders.
• Depression
• Substance Abuse
• No clear bright line as to the types of mental disorders a victim may suffer.
• Certain events may re-trigger the recollection of the trauma
• Intensity and frequency generally diminish over time.
• Victim must learn to continue to function despite reactions.
• Victims frequently encounter social isolation and invalidation of their efforts to come to terms with their experiences.

Chronic Developmental Exposure to Trauma
• Attachment- intimate relationships suffer.
• Biology-trauma affects emotional regulation, cognitive functioning, ability to learn from past experiences.
• Affect-can’t tolerate stress, hyperactivity, communication skills suffer.
• Dissociation- those who suffer on-going trauma can suffer from amnesia.
• Behavioral-hinders appropriate impulse control, aggression, disrupted sleep.
• Cognitive difficulty in concentration.
• Self-concept-fragmented though patterns, struggle with self-esteem.

Trauma Impacts on Relationships
• Trust- relationships suffer from lack of trust. In this of itself means that there is a lack of attachment and bonding for people with other people. Attachment is the emotional connection between people. Usually, it begins with the primary caregiver and bonding describes the feelings, thoughts, and behaviors of one person to another. If the perpetrator that initiated the trauma with the victim, then this process is hinder or even severed.

Coming Out of Darkness
There is always deliverance from the bondages of darkness that has surrounded our lives. Confession and surrender to Father God delivers us from darkness in our lives. It is through the redemptive act of Jesus Christ that the process of deliverance from these chains can be healed over time.
“Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: in whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins.” Col. 1:13-14

No Fear!
I Jn. 4: 16b & 18.
“God is love. There is no fear in love; perfect love drives out all fear. So then, love has not been made perfect in anyone who is afraid, because fear has to do with punishment. There is no fear in love; perfect love drives out all fear.”

Every Monday night at 7:00 PM we have our Bible Study at our home. I must say that I did not prepare for the study. To my shame I did not pray or study the scriptures or even really think of the study until the doorbell rang. At the beginning of the study we always pray asking God to guide us for the night. Not knowing why I asked my wife to read the above mentioned scripture. As she began to read I felt the presence of God so strong that I could hardly speak. It was like God touching my chest. I began to weep and it was hard for me to talk. I had to stop several times to calm down so I could continue with the study.
During our study the Lord brought to my memory some words that my father use to say. What I am going to say are the exact words that my father use to say when I was a child. I must have heard it from my father a hundred times. My father use to say the following, “Everything I touch turns to shit”. My father had a very low self-esteem and he passed that on to me. I use to think and say that very same thing that my earthly use to say about himself.

In short, the first thing I believe what God is saying from the above mentioned scripture is do we believe that He is love and that He loves us unconditionally? If we know this than we know that He has not forgotten us. He has not ignored us nor will He fail to perfect His plan for our lives. The second thing that we need to believe is that we are His masterpiece and no matter how many times we mess up He will continue to love us.

Most of us suffer from some very traumatic experiences that have left deep scars on our lives. We have been told by others that we have no worth. We have been made to feel that we are failures. At times we feel that we have nothing to offer to anyone. This is the fear that the scripture speaks about. The feeling of inadequacy torments us. We punish ourselves over and over again for past mistakes. I don’t know if you ever have asked God for forgiveness for not believing in Him? I don’t know if you ever have asked God forgiveness for thinking that He does not love you? I don’t know if you ever felt that God only blesses His favorite people?
God is not deaf or blind. He sees and hears all. He heard your first cry for forgiveness and He forgave you. Now, He wants you to forgive yourself. He wants you to believe in His love for you. You are His master piece!

Let the knowledge of His love for YOU sink deep into your soul and drive out all fear! Receive His love today!

Acting on the Word of God
Introduction
We must understand that believing demands action and creates action. Mental ascent only admires and admits a truth, but does not act on it. Acting on the word of God is letting Jesus Christ act through you. Acting on the word, then gives God his power to move on your behalf. Given the word, its place is giving Christ his position of Lordship in your life. The problem of believing is made simple when we know that it is acting on what God has spoken.
In the parable of the wise builder is very plain, that everyone who hears the teachings of Christ, and acts upon them will be found to resemble a wise person who built their house upon the rock. Jesus and His word are one and doing the word is letting Jesus have control in our lives. He that does not do the word never built upon a solid foundation. We must become doers of the word, or else the entire structure of our lives, family, and even faith is destroyed. You can tell whether a person is building on sand, or on the rock, by noting whether they are practicing or not, whether they are acting on the word.

“Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like someone who looks at his face in a mirror and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like. But whoever looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues in it—not forgetting what they have heard, but doing it—they will be blessed in what they do.” James 1; 22-25 KJV
But prove yourselves doers of the word [actively and continually obeying God’s precepts], and not merely listeners [who hear the word but fail to internalize its meaning], deluding yourselves [by unsound reasoning contrary to the truth]. For if anyone only listens to the word without obeying it, he is like a man who looks very carefully at his natural face in a mirror; for once he has looked at himself and gone away, he immediately forgets what he looked like. But he who looks carefully into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and faithfully abides by it, not having become a [careless] listener who forgets but an active doer [who obeys], he will be blessed and favored by God in what he does [in his life of obedience]. James 1; 22-25 Amplified Version

The Self-Deluded Person
Many people think that hair knowledge is sufficient. I’m not against education. I have advanced degrees in psychology, sociology, criminology, as well as theology.
What I do know, though, is that anyone who thinks that knowledge is all that they need to succeed will fail miserably. It is the doer of the word, the man who practices it, lives it, walks in it, speaks the word of God, the bills into his own life, who got honors. There’s a grave danger of diluting ourselves when we think we just have had knowledge. When I was in seminary, I learned Greek and Hebrew. I knew the history of the word of God but I met many people who did not practice it. It’s when you come to a hard place in your life when your back is up against the wall, when one turns to God. Living the Word of God is practicing the Word of God.
Characteristics of Self Delusion
The scriptures described people who are who can’t make up their mind. They are always vacillating from one extreme to another. From one idea to another to one. This type of person is called double minded. It has to do with loyalty. It is a matter of the heart. What or whom do we hold dear.
• How we Start.
I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God. Rom. 12: 1-2.
Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies [dedicating all of yourselves, set apart] as a living sacrifice, holy and well-pleasing to God, which is your rational (logical, intelligent) act of worship. And do not be conformed to this world [any longer with its superficial values and customs], but be transformed and progressively changed [as you mature spiritually] by the renewing of your mind [focusing on godly values and ethical attitudes], so that you may prove [for yourselves] what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect [in His plan and purpose for you]. Rom. 12: 1-2. Amplified Bible
• Being Double Minded.
If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him. But let him ask in faith (the heart), with no doubting (the mind), for he who doubts is like a wave of the sea driven and tossed by the wind. For let not that man suppose that he will receive anything from the Lord; he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways. James 1:5-8. (KJV)
If you need wisdom, ask our generous God, and he will give it to you. He will not rebuke you for asking. But when you ask him, be sure that your faith is in God alone. Do not waver, for a person with divided loyalty is as unsettled as a wave of the sea that is blown and tossed by the wind. Such people should not expect to receive anything from the Lord. Their loyalty is divided between God and the world, and they are unstable in everything they do. James 1:5-8. (NLT)

The Lifestyle of a Doer of the Word of God.
Unless you were Doer of the Word, you’re not a believer of the word. You have nothing more than a Mental Assent without action, a mere empty profession of religious words. Jesus would call them a sand foundation, just the sand house made by idle hands on the seashore to be destroyed by the next incoming tide. What a danger is a religion of words if there is no corresponding action, if no one is a doer of the word, he is a foolish builder on the sand on his five physical senses.

Understand this, if you are a doer of the word, you know that the word is living in your lips. It’s just as all the masters will get himself. Jesus himself said that He is a living word in you. He is with you in the presence of the Almighty, Holy Spirit that lives within us. He hasn’t left us alone, and he will not leave us alone. His ability is our ability. His strength is our strength. As we begin to do the word, He begins to do it us and through us.
James 2; 20 (Moffat Translation) says faith without deeds is barren. It is a mirror empty words that sound lovely and beautiful, but they are never crystallize or made real. Weymouth translation says faith without corresponding actions is of no effect. So, what it is saying is that we must Act on the Word regardless of our feelings people rely on their feelings, instead of relying on what the Word says.
If we need to love those who are difficult scripture says that the Love of God, agape love dwells within us. We must act in love no matter what our flesh (physical senses) says or how we feel.

The Doer of the Word sees answered prayer. People healed, saved, and delivered from the devil.

“You, my children, who belong to God have already defeated this spirit, because the one who lives in you is far stronger than the anti-Christ in the world. The agents of the anti-christ are children of the world, they speak the world’s language and the world, of course, pays attention to what they say. I John 4:4,
We then, as workers together with him, beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain. 2 Cor. 6:1
What shall we then say to these things? (What things?) If God be for us, who can be against us?
Rom. 8:31

Introduction
What are the greatest battles I have seen within Christianity is for believers to understand the importance of the Word of God in their lives. We must understand that. The apostle Paul told us in Romans 12:1-2, that we need to continually renew our minds so you understand God’s working and guidance in our lives. The Word takes the place of the unseen, Jesus. Meditation in the Word is a visit with the Almighty Savior. The Word needs to get into our very being. It may become our very nature. We are to react only using the Word of God.

Acts 19:20 states “so mightily grew the word of God and Prevailed. This took place in revival an emphasis that was shaking the very nation. Ephesus was the central point of idolatry. It was not Paul’s preaching. It was not his logical or philosophy. It was a Word of God that made the difference. Acts 12:24 says the word of God grew and multiplied. It grew in the minds of people It gained against supremacy over them. We are to follow God through His Word by faith not by our carnal senses. When we preach the Word of God, the Lord confirms His Word, with signs and wonders.

Faith makes the Word Prevail.

We have heard time in again, that the Word of God comes by faith. Many Christians really do not have faith in the Word of God. Faith must become our second nature. We must judge every circumstance that we confront, every situation that is contrary to the word of God. We must go to the word of God to see how Jesus would handle any situation.

Matthew 8: 23–27 we see the word of the prevailing in Jesus lips. He even commanded the laws of nature. You remember He said to his disciples “oh, ye of little faith, then He arose in rebuked the winds and the sea, and there was a great calm, and they stated what manner of man is this even the winds, and the sea obey Him.”

The Word prevailed in The Faith of the Centurion.

When Jesus had entered Capernaum, a centurion came to him, asking for help. “Lord,” he said, “my servant lies at home paralyzed, suffering terribly. Jesus said to him, “Shall I come and heal him?” The centurion replied, “Lord, I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. But just say the WORD, and my servant will be healed. For I am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, ‘Go,’ and he goes; and that one, ‘Come,’ and he comes. I say to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.” When Jesus heard this, he was amazed and said to those following him, “Truly I tell you, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. Matthew 8:5-10.
The word on the lips of Jesus prevailed over the disease in the centurion’s servant.
In Matthew 14:13-21. The word in Jesus lips ruled the law of supply and demand. Five loaves and two fishes multiplied until 5000 people are fed and 12 baskets of fragments were left over.
It says in John 1:1-3 “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that has been made.”

Jesus and the Word are One.

Can you imagine that the Lord God has used the human language by calling Jesus a word. Do you understand that the whole universe was brought into being by WORDS. We have the SPOKEN WORD, on the lips of Jesus: then we have the WORD made flesh that came and wealth amongst us; then we have the SPOKEN WORDS on the lips of the apostles before the Pauline revelation came. And finally, these WORDS were put on paper in the language that we might understand and have a permanent record of the Living Word.
And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us… John 1:14
For this reason, we also thank God without ceasing, because when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you welcomed it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the Word of God, who Himself effectively works in you who believe. I Thess. 2:13 (Moffat).
He sent His word and healed them, and delivered them from their destructions. Psalms 107:20
The Word Prevails Over our Senses.

Hebrews 11:1, says that faith is giving the substance of things we have hope for. Hope and faith are always in combat. Faith wins because it is real. Hope it’s always future it’s a dream. is never real. Faith reaches up and graphs hope, and brings it into the present realm.
The central truth of this teaching regarding faith versus feelings is;
• #1 we need to find a promise of God for whatever you are seeking.
• #2; believe God ‘s word.
• #3; do not consider contradictory circumstances.
• #4; praise God for the answer.

We cannot understand God by our feelings. We are told to walk by faith and what God ‘s Word says to us. The only way will get to know God and understand Him and get acquainted with Him is through the word. Many people want goosebumps, they want to feel good, then they think their prayers are heard. God says without faith it is impossible to please him. Our faith should not be based on feelings but should be based on God ‘s word. This is not Christian Science. We base our faith on God and His Word not in the mind. I am not saying to ignore the symptoms of the body. I am telling you to get your body into line with what God’s Word says.

Carnality vs. Spirituality

For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh (controlled by our five senses), but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded (controlled by our five senses) is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. 7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. Rom. 8:5-7 (KJV)
Listen to teachings on the Battle of the Mind, Think on Purpose, Words Have Power.

Don’t Consider Your Body

Faith changed Abraham’s hope into reality as he believed the Word of God that came to him.
And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about a hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sara’s womb: he staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; and being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, He was able also to perform.
Romans 4: 19-21

The Word on Our Lips

We are told to preach and teach the Word of God. In the ministry of Jesus on earth He was fearless in the presence of disease and demons. He was one with the father and as he spoke the Father was speaking. In John 14:9, “Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

Jesus spoke the Word and He healed people, delivered people, The Apostles preached the Word and healed people, delivered people. To preach the Word is to preach Jesus!
“Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching.” 2 Tim. 4:2.
The Word Makes Us Conquerors! The Word of God on our lips makes us conquers. We are longer victims of sin, sickness, and disease. We are no longer bound to Satan. We are no longer bound to circumstances and situations. We are Overcomer’s because He overcame. He overcame hate. He overcame demons. He overcame sickness and disease. He became the sacrificial lamb taking the wrath of the Father, which fell upon Him so we can walk and victory. He became sin, who knew no sin so we could become the righteousness of God, His works, we can do because He has given us all authority.

I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me. Phil. 4:13

He has delivered us from the power of darkness and [a]conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son of His love. Col. 1:13.

Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think of anything as being from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God, who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. 2 Cor. 3: 5-6

If you would like to donate to the ministry you can use;
Cash App with’ $DrTimothyEmerick
Zelle; HarvestEvangelisticAssociation@aol.com
PayPal: HarvestEvangelisticAssociation@aol.com

The Beauty of His Righteousness

You love righteousness and hate wickedness; therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy. All your robes are fragrant with myrrh and aloes and cassia; from palaces adorned with ivory the music of the strings makes you glad. Psalm 45:7–8

Those words are addressed prophetically by the psalmist to the Lord Jesus. They are a picture of Jesus – His character, His attitude, and the reason why the Lord exalted Jesus.

It’s important for us to understand that Jesus was not treated as a favored Son. He was not given promotion that He had not earned, but He earned His promotion and the reason given here is His attitude in moral matters. Jesus through His sacrifice fulfilled the requirements of the law. He was one who knew no sin but became the sacrificial lamb for us. The wrath of sin as explained in scripture fell upon Jesus instead falling upon ourselves. This is why His redemptive work cannot be added to. When Jesus finished His work on Calvary He ascended on high and sat down at the right hand of Father God because His work was finished. The beauty of His righteousness now was given to the resurrected church to carry out spreading the Good News!

The psalmist says, “You love righteousness and hate wickedness; therefore, God has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy.” It was the attitude of Jesus in the matters of righteousness and wickedness that caused God to promote Him.

Notice that there’s no neutrality in these matters. If we love righteousness, we will hate wickedness. We cannot compromise with it. And also notice the beauty that goes with righteousness: the fragrance of myrrh and aloes and cassia and the melody of strings from a place of ivory palaces. What a beautiful picture that is of righteousness and how righteousness causes God to exalt those who practice it.

Crooked Made Straight!
I will go before you and make the crooked places straight . . .
Isaiah 45:2

We live in a time where we as Christian want instant answers. We have been contaminated with the mindset and attitudes of the world. When we become Christians, we are no longer a friend to the world. We must think, speak, and live differently than the world. The world is an atmosphere in which evil resides.

I know that at times we all go through difficult things, but God gives us a promise of great hope. We must understand that we are not tourists in the world. We are in a journey unto wholeness and completeness and God is not in a hurry. He cares about quality and wholeness. We get ourselves into trouble by living wrong, eating wrong, spending wrong, not saving, and not giving. And now we want God to get us out of the mess that we have created. We want everything in a hurry. We have not obeyed God in putting Him first in every area of our lives and we have made a mess of things. And sometimes people do not want to change. It is too painful for them and it requires responsible behavior.
• Marriages
• Finances
• Relationships
• Some people like top play the victim.
• Our speech and attitudes.
• Broken promises.
• Employment

Christian discipleship has become a tourist mindset. We think God is our tour guide and not Lord of our lives. We have exchanged the commandments of God as if they were suggestions. A disciple is to spend their lives living for their Master. He has given us a guidebook called the Bible. All truth rests in Jesus Christ. Jn. 14:5-6. If we chose the path of disciples and pilgrims, we would eventually see the Wisdom of God unfold in our lives. It may take time as we persist, but God is Faithful.

All we need to do is stay in faith and walk in the truth of God’s Word. Those areas where we have been judged harshly, or condemned or mistreated by others God will straighten things out. There are areas in our own lives that we feel we will never overcome but the promise of God is that He will make all things straight. Understand that God is working behind the scenes to make things right. He is working to give us the victory even though you cannot see it now. God says. “all things work together for good for those who love Him.” We don’t blame God for the trouble, but we trust in Him in the middle of difficult circumstances to make all things straight!

Faith Sees the Answer!
Introduction.

Our past teachings on faith helps us understand faith is not hope. Faith is present hope is future. Then we examined the relation of feelings versus faith. We have seen and past teachings that faith is not hoping that we will receive the answer sometime in the future. We rely on our human senses that is contrary to the revelation truth of the word of God. Now we must understand that understanding these previous discussed concepts we move on to the central truth of seeing that truth faith see the answer. Christ said ‘Father, I am glad that you always hear me.’ John 11:42
Faith is believing that we have the answer now and says thank you Father!! The eyes of faith see the answer has if it already happened.
Calling those things that are not as though they were. ‘as it is written, “I have made you a father of many nations’ in the presence of Him whom he believed God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did. He did not waver at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strengthened in faith, giving glory to God, and being fully convinced that what He had promised He was also able to perform.’ Romans 4:17, 20-21.

The Word of God takes Prominent Place in your Life.

My son give attention to my words; Incline your ear to my sayings. Do not let them depart from your eyes; Keep them in the midst of your heart; For they are life to those who find them, And health to all their flesh. Proverbs 4:20-22

• People fail because they see themselves failing, in doubt, sick, dying, maybe they have anger or resentment against someone in their heart.
• Jesus took our infirmities.

Surely, He has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; Yet we esteemed Him stricken, Smitten by God, and afflicted. But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed. Isa. 53: 4-5.
‘When evening had come, they brought to Him many who were demon-possessed. And He cast out the spirits with a word, and healed all who were sick, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaiah the prophet, saying: “He Himself took our infirmities’ and bore our sicknesses.” Matt. 8:17.
• God’s Word is life and healing.
• Get your mind on the answer, not the problem.

Faith Contradicts Circumstances

….for He Himself has said, “I will never leave you nor forsake you.” So, we may boldly say: “The LORD is my helper; I will not fear. What can man do to me?” Heb. 13:5-6.
• We walk by Faith not by our feelings.
• People speak defeat, disease, and poverty.
• Wrong thinking, wrong believing, and wrong talking will result in wrong living.

Faith Sees the Answer and says Thank You Father!
who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness—by whose stripes you were (past tense) healed.
1 Peter 2:24.
And my God shall supply all your need according to His riches in glory by Christ Jesus. Phil. 4:19.
The LORD is my light and my salvation; Whom shall, I fear? The LORD is the strength of my life; Of whom shall I be afraid? Psalm 27:1.
For assuredly, I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, ‘Be removed and be cast into the sea,’ and does not doubt in his heart, but believes that those things he says will be done, he will have whatever he says. Mark 11:23
• Real Faith in God simply says what God says about themselves and circumstances.

Believe in your Heart!

What is the heart hear? It is not your physical heart and it is not your inner man which is your spirit. Your heart here is used that of most inner depths of your psych being your mind and your personality.
A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart brings forth evil. For out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks. Luke 6:45

How you believe, (think) is how you will speak. And how you speak will is how you will live.