Update: Fixed some grammar in my second to last paragraph.

I posted this review of Seeds of Deception nearly a month ago. I was as honest as I could be about Preskar’s work. When checking Stacy Harp’s Mind and Media review list, I noticed that Ms. Preskar had replied to my review. Continuing the trend of highlighting reader comments for everyone on the blog, I will post it here in full. In order to make my replies clearer, I will simply respond after each relevant point.

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your heated review of my Book. Both David and you became very upset while reviewing my Book. When a Book stirs up such emotions, it draws attention to it. Obviously everyone does not like the same kind of book. For the very reasons you did not like my Book, others did.
I did not actually get “upset” at the book, nor would I call my review “heated.” Rather, I affirmed your position on a number of points, and then pointed out what I thought the basic problem of your work: it’s a conspiracy theory and the evidence is personal testimony. You don’t inspire trust in the reader, and consequently your argument suffers.

It is a story. Itis a journey and meant to tell the journey and not just the facts. Of course you sound like a man who would not enjoy the journey of discovery. It is interesting that other men have written positives about the Book; it was my concern that perhaps men would not enjoy it. I have found you and David and one other to be the only ones not to enjoy it.
May I simply suggest that you read the recent discussion on Tom Bombadil? Do think twice before suggesting that someone doesn’t “enjoy the journey of discovery.” I’m not upset–it’s so off the mark that it’s quite laughable. As for making it a “story,” it seemed that the “story” detracted more from the book than enhanced it. But that’s merely a stylistic point.

As for the ideas of the Book, it is rather obvious that my discovery is the Marxist Dialectic that is permeating our society through programs such as SEED. Understanding the “compromise” brought my ideas of mind control to reality, and now I see for myself what is happening in our country. I certainly gave credit to Dean Gotcher throughout the Chapters, as I did to all of my resources.
Well, that’s just where we disagree. I actually don’t find it obvious that “Marxist Dialectic” is at work in society any more than “Platonic Dialectic.” When you start identifying the use of “circles” in classrooms with “Marxist Dialectic” and “witchcraft,” your position, well, loses credibility. I happen to have attended a solid Christian university that uses “circles” in the classroom and teaches in a “discussion” format–of course, that may mean we’re all Marxists, but if you run around saying that, people will laugh at you. Really.

I did use many footnotes and told when I found my sources in other sources. That did not mean that I did not check them out for myself. I refuse to write a Book that does not credit every thought or idea from other people, or books, or websites. I would never cheat anyone of the respect due them for their thoughts or knowledge on subject matter. I would also not cheat anyone of the ackowlegment that I found a source in their book. I am proud of my research and will debate anyone about its authenticity and value in writing my Book.
Again, I never suggested that you didn’t cite appropriately. I merely mentioned that I am suspicious of the sources that you use. Why, for instance, should we trust books like “The Pink Swastika”? That’s my only question. If you are reacting to my statement that I wanted to “inquire for myself from the original sources,” that should make you happy. It means I want to look into the credibility of your argument. As it is, your analysis depends upon secondary works that may or may not be credible. I’m simply not sure.

As for using Purpose Driven Church material, it is a part of the whole picture of brainwashing. Eugene Peterson’s Book, The Message, changes the words of God in the Bible. I am not going to hide this fact and it is just the way it is. Warren used it in his Book; I did not! I am not calling Warren a bad person or what he has accomplished as bad, only the way he got there. I do not believe that the end justifies the means.
Again, I did not suggest that you called Warren a bad person. However, I will ask for arguments. What makes you think that Warren is attempting to “brainwash” America? You assert it in the book, but frankly, it seems preposterous. I always tell my students to make arguments, not assertions. I would simply ask you to do the same.

In January I put out a new edition; unfortunately I sent old copies to Mind and Media and these went to you. My new edition has many of the editing errors corrected, plus more information in the Purpose Chapter. It also includes information on a teacher who went through SEED and is willing to testify against it.

What does amaze me about you and David is that there is no concern shown throughout your entire review about the children and what is happening to them because of the brainwashing that is consistently being used in the schools. There is no review of the incredible evidence of the horrors of the homosexual lifestyle and what it does to their mind, body and spirit. At first the desire to be respected permeated the homsexual agenda, but now it is our children and marriage they seek. As for the White Privilege, if you did not get this part, I am not sure why? I can’t help you with this one.
I am concerned about students educations for more reasons than their simply being brainwashed. I teach in a program designed for home-school students–I know all the problems of public schools, and I am deeply opposed to the worldview often promulgated there (note: read The Abolition of Man for an explanation of my complaints). On the other hand, my brother is an educator in a public school and works extremely hard to provide solid education for his students (and is quite successful, judging both from his debate teams and his student’s blogs). So I am concerned, but I will not call for the destruction of public schools (to use the hyperbole you seem to be fond of!) without more evidence and better reasoning. You must convince this soldier before he will go to war.

Regarding homosexuality, I did not think it important to rehearse the horrors of the lifestyle. My job was to review the book, not repeat it. Frankly, there was nothing in the book about the lifestyle that wasn’t available somewhere else. As for my own position on the issue, though I’ve never posted on it, the general tenor of this blog will make it unsurprising that I am against the legalization of homosexual marriage and against the promotion of the homosexual lifestyle in the public square.

Regarding what you said about “White Privilege,” your question makes me think you didn’t actually read my review. I never suggested I didn’t “get it.”

David of course believes all my material is made up nonsense. He calls it hateful and uses the outdated rhetoric of people who truly are brainwashed.

And my complaint is simply that you use the “outdated rhetoric of people who truly are brainwashed.” That’s not quite my complaint, but it’s close. The problem with “brainwashing” arguments are that they cut both ways. How do we know you aren’t in the same camp as the people you criticize (namely, “brainwashed”)?

He is upset because I suggest keeping children away from homsexuals because of influences on them or perhaps even their attentions on them.

Now this makes sense, since all studies indicate many children are homosexual because of adult child molestations by family members. The statistcs are high amongst homosexuals that molest children. I am NOT saying that all homosexuals molest children as David so ridiculously has said on his review. That is a blatant lie! Amazing he is more concerned about the homosexuals then our children and their loss of innocence.
This deals with David’s review, not mine. I don’t know the statistics, and if I did, I probably wouldn’t trust them anyway.

I do not believe that either of you have the ability to understand what I was saying in the Book and it has nothing to do with the material or how it was written, for even with the first edition mistakes, I still have people telling me how much they enjoyed it. It has to do with a mind set that refuses to see what is clearly happening in our world of today.
I would simply invite you to stick around Mere-Orthodoxy and read for a while. Inquire for yourself whether your statement that I lack the “ability to understand what [you were] saying” is true. It is a heavy charge you make, and you should not make it lightly. Regardless, it is not a very effective way of winning people to your side or making friends–especially since I gave your book a charitable review. I suggest you read it again. For other readers, I’ll simply quote my own words: “However, if Preskar is right about SEED, then she is right to be concerned,” and “If this is what SEED promulgates, then Preskar and I agree,” and “From the language of the website, this actually seems a tenable claim to make.” The complaint I had with your book was simply that your argument did not lead to your conclusions.

I do thank you for reviewing the Book.

Georgiana Preskar

You are always welcome to comment at Mere-O. If you read, you may find writers who are closer to being your friends than your enemies. However, we are the sort of friends who above all honor the Truth and attempt for clarity and care in our thinking. We are interested in transforming our culture, and of seeing the cause of Christ triumph, but we will not sacrifice intellectual integrity to make this happen.

Thank you for joining us at Mere-O. I hope you find the dialogue informative and pleasant. I harbor no hard feelings toward you for your comments–I would simply encourage you to be more guarded before you attack those who criticize either your positions or your books. If you want your message heard, then being a winsome proponent of it will simply sell more books.

Yours ever,

Matt Anderson


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Posted by Matthew Lee Anderson

Matthew Lee Anderson is the Founder and Lead Writer of Mere Orthodoxy. He is the author of Earthen Vessels: Why Our Bodies Matter to our Faith and The End of Our Exploring: A Book about Questioning and the Confidence of Faith. Follow him on Twitter or on Facebook.


  1. Nice takedown. Well-put and friendly in tone, but a takedown nonetheless. =)


  2. Dear Mr. Anderson,

    Thank you for your great review of my comments about your review of Seeds of Deception:Planting Destruction of America’s Children They were honest and I certainly did not take them as a put down in any way. In fact I am enjoying my interactions with people on my Book. I will respond to your comments.

    You mentioned the circle as being out of place in my explanation of the tools used in the Marxist Dialectic. I agree that the circle is used in many settings. Teaching religious education, I used it myself. We use it now in Bible Study. It is useful in bonding people, but it is with people who hold the same beliefs.

    The SEED circle is used to include and exclude in order to change people’s minds and win them over to their belief system. LOVE is the motivating force for changing SEED attendees from traditional values to SEED values of moral relativism. The group wins over the person to their side. This is far different than using it to bond people of similar beliefs.

    The pagan circle has very special rituals connected to it accompanied by spells and other magic. This is far different than a circle simply to share our beliefs with each other or pray to God. It is used for evil in many of these instances.

    As for you thinking the Marxist Dialectic is not part of our society, just take a look at our society and one cannot deny it. Everyday teens debate their parents, but now they win because they are using the dialectic to get their parents to compromise. Amazing that years ago parents simply said “NO” and did not have to give their children explanations. They were smart enough to know that when you get out of the “IS” and the “absolutes” that one can easily be compromised in decisions.

    Teens today wear scanty clothing, date at early ages, go to wild parties, see “R”rated movies, listen to awful music, read disgusting books, and are submitted to pornographic sex-Ed classes in schools. Teens and children are taught that homosexuality and same sex marriage is okay, euthanasia is elevated to high status, Marxist thought is the ideal, and teens are allowed to check out of schools to have abortions and all because of the compromise.

    If you truly understood the Marxist Dialectic you would see how this is happening. There must be two opposing views. Each position is a thesis. The opposing view is the antithesis. In order for the final stage of synthesis to arrive, each side must put aside their differences and come up with a solution that is good for both.

    The problem with parents coming out of their absolutes is that once they begin the debate with the teen, the adults usually compromise. Teens are great at introducing paradoxes or mentally disorienting their parents. The teens have an amazing way of presenting facts regarding a “party” that make it seem okay for the parents to let them attend, even though the original “NO” was the best answer. This is happening across America in businesses, churches, schools and the family unit.

    Teachers, that go through SEED, are shown the movie It’s Elementary. They are told to go back into the classroom and introduce homosexuality in a sensitive manner, which is taught on the film, to the first graders. The teachers have homosexual couples come into the classroom and they then debate the issue of the homosexual lifestyle and marriage. The question is always presented as to what could possibly be wrong with these two people who only want to love and marry each other. I bet they even use the circle to include everyone who believes in homosexuality?

    Can you honestly say that political correctness is not the Marxist Dialectic? Can you honestly not see that setting up the oppression and victim status and teaching it in classrooms across America is not the Marxist Dialectic in action? Please I ask that you rethink your stand on this issue.

    Some say that black and white thinking is bad…not so. What is bad is that authority throughout America has been compromised as to right and wrong. Our men, as head of the family, have been removed from households. This is not in the best interest of the family unit. The lack of manly influence is producing more violence and unrest. Role models are disappearing to the unisex roles being taught in schools.

    As for Rick Warren, no I do not believe he sat down one day and said I am going to brainwash the Nation. Please be realistic about this for he truly does not see what is happening nor can most people when it comes to the Purpose Driven Church or the Growth Movement, which David Kupelian from World Net Daily adequately wrote about in his most recent article in Whistleblower Magazine. It gives an accurate account of why our churches are losing their identity in America today and one of them is the Church Growth Movement.

    You can also get great info about the Purpose Driven Church in a Book written by Warren Smith called Deceived on Purpose. There is also a book out by James Sunquist called Who’s Driving the Purpose Driven Church.

    It was never my intent to expound on this topic, but it certainly caused a big stir with people who follow this movement, even to the point of almost hysteria at a confernce I attended. When they read what was in my Book, they became almost hysterical trying to protect Rick Warren and even to the point of trying to get me out of the conference and calling me an aetheist.

    It was remarkable that once again they did not focus on the Massachusetts Scandal or pedophilia or the horrors of teachers being trained to go back to the classroom with anti-American and pro-homosexual ideas. Instead I realized they would have defended Rick to the death. It only backed further my theory of brainwashing for these people were in Stage 4 of Mind Control, Chapter 9 in my Book.

    I couldn’t help but think of my Sociology background and facts learned about group interactions as I watched Rick Warren’s followers searching for ways to fight me and my so called “hate” filled remarks about their leader. The group built to such a level that there was actually a man in a wheechair that came toward me at a very fast pace and I thought he was going to run me over.

    In actuality in my new version, I state that I have nothing against this man, but his methods. The materials, The Message by Eugene Peterson, and small group sessions are not in alignment with my idea of God’s Purpose for us, as I said in both versions. I do not think a Book or a man can give us God’s Purpose for our life for it ultimately is to honor and love Him. Once this begins, the rest unfolds.

    The Message directly misquotes the Bible and interprets differently even the Our Father. Mr. Anderson, I will take the Lord’s Word any day over The Message. I will listen to God, at the end of Revelations, as He told us not to reword His Words. I will also listen to Him about not signing covenants as Rick Warren has people do in his 40 Day Program.

    You made a statment that you are not concerned with the children “simply being brainwashed.” I am very concerned about this issue for I see Mind Control as destroying our children and our Nation’s future. It is not SIMPLY brainwashing.

    We actually got the attention of the Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings about this program and hopefully she will take some action. This is SERIOUS stuff and nothing to push aside. We are not only talking about a life filled with disease of mind, body and soul, but our children’s eternity.

    Yes I do think that brainwashing is serious for the facts they are learning will lead them right to SIN. Yes I will use that politically correct word that most people laugh at just as they do communism. The Lord is clear when He says that it is better for a man to tie a millstone around his neck and throw himself into the sea than to lead little ones into sin. He is very clear on His position against people leading our little ones into sin and we must be the light to prevent this from happening.

    You next said that my info was everywhere and nothing new. I must ask why did so many people write me and tell me they had NO idea it had gone so FAR? Many people who read the book had no idea about the Homosexual Manifesto, nor the Massachusetts Scandal, nor the murders of innocent children by homosexuals, nor the homosexuals involvement in Nazi Germany, nor the White Privilege information, nor the pedophilia info., nor the book list of GLSEN and especially the SEED material. In fact many did not even know there was a Humanist Manifesto or that WEAVE had taken on a liberal stand in Sacramento to teach our children homosexuality and white privilege.

    The important thing that is missed by you is that the “CAUSE” of the homosexuals to be acknowledged as normal will take priority over the innocence of our children. SEED feeds into their agenda and into all other agendas (causes) that are powerfully coming together to change our country. Of course they are not sitting down together and saying “Let’s Destroy America” for they themselves are brainwashed into believing they are doing something wonderful for humanity and it’s always based on love.

    As for the material I used from Scott Lively’s Book, if you look again, there are many references that are quoted from his book that I mention in the footnote section that you can buy on line to check out the facts. They do come from first sources.

    As for your brother being a great teacher, I congratulate him. We are losing them fast. In Elk Grove alone we had over 800 teachers go through SEED. We’ve had thousands of parents go through it. Teens are sent to summer camps where they learn the oppression wheel and white privilege and attend homophobic classes. They end the day with the drums beating and the circle formation. Following the camp, they have nothing but positive words to describe their process of transformation. They go back into the schools pledged to change others to their thinking.

    I did not mean to offend you by saying that I do not think you “got” the Book, but when you say things like mind control and brainwashing do not exist when it is right before your eyes, I can not think anything different.

    I do agree with you that you did say some positive things about Seeds of Deception. Your review was well taken and constuctive from your viewpoint. All reviews cannot be perfect. I surely have received some great ones and for these I am thankful.

    Interesting that after reading the horrible reviews of David Rattigan, my husband and I both agreed that he must be homosexual. A few days ago he “came out” to his mom, dad, family and blog site. No wonder he was so emotional when he wrote the review.

    Your review was not at all like his and I did not mean to put you in the same category. I do appreciate the positives and the negatives of your review and the time you spent to do it.

    Keep up the great site.

    For God, Family and Country
    Georgiana Preskar
    Director Eagle Forum of Sacramento


  3. Thank you, Ms. Preskar, for attempting to counter (the other) Mr. Anderson’s criticisms, thereby furthering the dialectic.


  4. Interesting exchange. I read the review when it was originally published and it was unique and insightful for the writer to respond.

    Matt, I have to say you have talent for the polemic. Any interest in the law?

    Take care,


  5. Dear Bloggers,

    Thank you for your quick response. I must admit that I see nothing wrong with healthy exchanges of ideas about such issues as the above. It is enjoyable.

    What the dialectic seeks to do is to transform, with plotted intent, the minds of the SEED attendees. Below is a representation of what they learn in the behind “closed” door sessions they provide for teachers. This is a total infringement on the rights of parents who send their children to school believing they will receive a neutral education with moral issues being left to the parents. The Supreme Court has deemed that the parents have the ultimate say in the education of their children.

    The below SEED class is an infringement on all students’ rights, for the childen walk into the classroom believing that they will receive an unbised education. What would happen if we went into the classroom and started teaching classes with underlying philosophies of Catholic or Jewish beliefs? The ACLU would go crazy. Here is the explantion of the SEED session.


    “Teachers will discuss samples of assignments and units that use both SEED principles and content area standards as the foundation for curriculum planning. Teachers will work together to find ways to incorporate SEED principles into their
    particular courses and to meet the challenges of making standards-based curriculum a meaningful, relevant part of students’ personal and moral

    This is when the dialectic becomes very dangerous for the Originator of the SEED program visits routinely the Peking University in Beijing at the request of the Marxist Women’s Group.
    She has made it clear that she wants to transform our education to meet their standards.

    Where is the tolerance and respect for people who hold moral values contrary to SEED? The teacher who went through SEED in MN saw their tolerance for they were rude to her and walked out on her presentation about ex-homosexuals who have taken the step to recovery. The First Amendment Rights of our Students are being abused everyday as they are held captive in the classroom while SEED teachers introduce all subject matter with their SEED philosophies underlying their teachings.

    This is deceitful and underhanded tactics. I do not and never will debate this issue or any other issues that deal with absolutes. It is wrong to go into the classroom and abuse these innocent children by a blantant indoctrination of them through SEED philosophies.

    Yes healthy discussion is one thing, but manipulation by deception is not tolerable!

    Thanks for responding and by the way have you read the book? It is very informative.

    For God, Family and Country
    Georgiana Preskar
    Director Eagle Forum of Sacramento


  6. Interesting exchange. I read the review when it was originally published and it was unique and insightful for the writer to respond.

    Matt, I have to say you have talent for the polemic. Any interest in the law?

    I did have an interest in the law once. In fact, I have recently considered taking a degree in Jurisprudence, but only if I could study with Robert George. However, it brings out a side of me that makes the fiance worry, so I don’t think I’ll do it anytime soon. I would like to do public debates though, someday. I just think it would be fun! : )


  7. […] Such an issue is of probably no interest to most educators or businessmen, but to those who work in Christian ministry (or Christian education in general) it is essential.  I have interacted with some more conservative adherants to Christianity (including this exchange!) who have argued that “open-ended” discussions are against the teachings of the Bible.  […]


Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *