Pacing the
Opposition
When an ecclesiastical
hierarchy wants to silence a dissenting movement,
dialectical praxis is often the weapon of
choice. For one thing, many dissenters are
simple-minded, honest-hearted people, who, when
they run up against the dialectic, they are
dumbfounded. For one thing, when the hierarchy
starts to lay out its case, it will present the
thesis, which is what the dissenter believes in
heart and soul. The reaction of the dissenters
is, “Wonderful!”
The
Catatonic Paralysis Shock of Antithesis
Then the hierarchy’s
argument shifts to the antithesis, the
opposite position from the thesis, and the
simple-minded, straight-thinking dissenter, whose
mind is not trained in this kind of subtlety,
throws up his hands and goes into a catatonic
state: “I thought they were on our side, now
look at this!” he says in disbelief and
moral paralysis.
The
Relief Offer of the Compromise Resolution of
Synthesis
Then a synthesis of the
thesis and antithesis is presented, and the poor,
honest-hearted dissenter, seeing ultimate
disaster if the antithesis is accepted, seeing
utter rejection and scorn ahead if he resists,
thankfully accepts the synthesis, a compromise,
for he sees elements of what he had hoped for,
though it has just as much of what he abhors.
The
Switch That Numbs the Mind
The
Inducement of the Catatonic State of Moral
Paralysis
Dr. Gotcher, commenting
on this phenomenon of catatonic paralysis writes:
“Hegel’s dialectic was the cause fro
two world wars and many wars between and since.
One historian recently stated that, during this
[20th] century, all governments that
used this process combined have been responsible
for the killing of more than 250,000,000 of their
own citizens…
The
Switch That Freezes Responses
“Somewhere within
the process there lies a switch that confuses
men’s minds, numbs their feelings, and
freezes their responses. Aware that something is
gaining control over them and not able to explain
or define what it is, they are unable to develop
any response that will stop the process. This
trigger shuts off man’s awareness of
impending danger (past history or depth history;
depth perception [note: look at the denial of the
Jews during the Holocaust]) and freezes his
ability to resist the process (indecision). The
numbness one experiences comes from the fear of
potential alienation and loss of respect because
of the inability to explain the differences
between what one says he believes (black and
white) and what he does or desires to do (gray
zone). This produces feelings that are not based
on God’s Word, but that are instead based
upon the fear of losing respect in the
eyes of others. This kind of fear prevents
one from making an immediate or effective
response. [Note: This is the catatonic state
induced by the dialectic.] This fear is
not from God, “For God hath not given us
the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love,
and of a sound mind.” 2 Timothy 1:7.
“No one who has
boarded this train has found brakes on it.
History has shown us that once this train gets
rolling, there is no stopping to get off. Rescue
can only come from someone outside, at much cost
to all. We had to rescue Europe from this train
twice, by wrecking it. If we get on board, who
can rescue us? And at what cost?” –Dr
Dean Gotcher, The Dialectic & Praxis: Diaprax
and the End of the Ages. Tulsa: LAR, 1996, p. 10.
Each
Dialectical Stage Builds on the Previous One
Then another meeting is
scheduled for later, in which the same process
occurs, the hopes are raised with the thesis,
which is in reality the new synthesis, then
dashed with the antithesis, the person goes into
a catatonic state again, and while spiritually
paralyzed, a solution is offered-namely the new
synthesis. Thus each time these Fabian tactics
wear down the dissenter a little bit more, until
he finally gives up and goes along without
resisting.
From Discipleship to
Pantheism
Dialectical praxis is
designed to take a person who believes in obeying
God by faith, and, moving him through various
psychological stages, re-educate his conscience,
until he ends up as a practical pantheist,
accepting every form of perversion there is, in
the name of unity with the group.
If you could save your
souls, your families, your home churches, you
must understand the nature of what you are facing
with dialectical praxis, for it is a blast right
out of the bottomless pit (Revelation 11), a
mind-bending technique that has crumpled nations,
churches, and all before it—and you must
become a skilled warrior in the Lord to resist it
if you would win eternal life.
You
Are Not Amenable to Any Man. You are Amenable to
God.
Beware of putting church
“unity” above a conscience bound to the
Word, for this is a fruitful field for those
utilizing dialectical praxis. Dialectical
praxis subjugates conscience to the authority of
the “group” instead of a conscience
subject to God alone. “You are not amenable
to any man. You are amenable to God.” GCW,
GCB, 4-5-01. Never, never, never, allow your
conscience to be stifled, mocked, or snuffed out
by peer pressure, by pressure for
“unity,” or by being attacked for being
“unloving” because you hold to moral
absolutes on conviction.
The Process of Dialectical Praxis
Here is Diaprax in a
nutshell, revealed by Dr. Dean Gotcher, who read
over 600 socio-psychology books, written by more
than 250 authors, developed from the perspective
of those who are trained in it. Night after
night, the Lord woke him up with insight after
insight at two or three o’clock in the
morning. “The answers came from God’s
Word,” Gotcher writes, “in fact, this
work is nothing more than a confirmation of that
Word. His Word clearly reveals the process being
used today to remove our desire to trust and obey
Him and His Word.” –Dean Gotcher, The
Dialectic & Praxis: Diaprax and the End of
the Ages, Acknowledgements. After this, we will
examine critical elements of this diabolical
process.
Diaprax in a Nutshell
(A look at the
strategy of the other side to destroy conscience)
(Based on Dr. Dean
Gotcher, “Diaprax”)
Thesis Interrogation:
“Unfreezing” the person from the Thesis
[faith in the authority of God]
Position: Identify
person’s source for needs satisfaction.
[Note: Pastors in training are taught to identify
people’s “felt needs.”]
“What do you think
about…? “How do you feel
about…?”
Definition: Discover
the source of one’s dissatisfaction-Higher
Authority. [Note: This is tantamount to
Satan’s words, “Yea, hath God
said?…]
“Could you explain
that further?” “What do you mean
by…?”
Choice-Defend your
position based on higher authority’s
definitions and cause social disharmony
(alienation-negative) or redefine your position
to build social harmony (belongingness-positive.)
Realization: Maladjustment
is when one defends their position with pre-set
definitions which cause social disharmony. “How
do you think you arrived at that view?”
“Why do you think you feel that way?”
“Have you considered the alternatives?”
In other words, ‘Can’t you think for
yourself?’
Antithesis Dialogue:
‘Moving’: (Environment-Group Dynamics)
Negation of
Negation: Putting aside
pre-set standards (‘Thou shalt not’) in
a diverse group produces an environment of
equality of opportunity where everyone can
discover their full ‘group think,’
socialist potential.
“How might this be
approached in another way?” “What are
the alternatives to your position?” (What
would happen if you refused to participate?)
Chaos: Learning
to accept the Gray Zone of the super-ego for the
sake of belonging. ‘Most agree…..Most
disagree.’ Learning how to redefine your
position in changing times for the sake of group
acceptance and social harmony.
“What might be the
result if…?” “What effect might
that have on…?” “What are the
consequences?”
Mediation: Evaluation
is non-scientific in that it is controlled by the
fear of the loss of group approval. One cannot
evaluate through compromise based upon fear of
social rejection. ‘Is’ has become
clouded with ‘should.’ “Which
is best? Right? Most desirable? Most functional?
Most practical?” “Why”
Synthesis Decision:
‘Refreezing’ (Life-long
learning-Reinventing truth)
Determination:
The individual is now a change
agent, determined to help
others into the process so he can justify his
compromise while developing relationships with
them. All who practice the dialectic are out to
convert everyone they meet, neutralizing those
who resist, and work to remove those who have any
type of authority who threaten or attack the
process.
Necessity: The
group members no longer see themselves subject to
any higher authority who attempts to resolve
social issues with an ‘I know’
attitude. In fact the social crisis no longer is
the issue to be solved but is instead to be used
to bring the traditional thinking person into the
group think process. Traditional thinking is now
the social crisis which needs to be solved for it
is not readily adaptable to social change and
produces social maladjustment.
Causation: No
longer is ‘First Cause’ a higher
authority, such as God, parents, the Laws of
Nature (true science), the Laws of the Land, but
now society is the first cause. Therefore,
one’s concern is ‘What will the group
(society) think?’ When you meet a
‘Group Think’ individual and present
him with Truth and facts, if he does not have the
group there to put pressure on you (group
dynamics) he will ‘glass over’ to
protect himself from you, the truth, and the need
to repent of his use of this process.
Dr. Dean Gotcher,
Diaprax. Institute for Authority Research.
Dialectical
Praxis at the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and
Evil
Thesis: “Of
the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of
the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of
it…lest ye die.” Genesis 3:3
Thesis
Interrogation: “Yea hath God said, Ye shall
not eat of every tree of the garden?”
Genesis 3:1.
Antithesis:
“Ye shall not surely die.” Genesis 3:4.
[Opposite of the Thesis]
Synthesis:
“For God doth know that in the day ye eat
thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye
shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.”
Genesis [Supposed Higher Order Thinking
Skills-Hots]
Negation of the
Negation (Putting aside pre-set standards):
“And when the woman saw that the tree was
good for food, and that it was pleasant to the
eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise
[Chaos], she took of the fruit [Moving] thereof,
and did eat [Refreezing], and gave also unto her
husband with her [Determination: She becomes
“converted” change agent seeking to
“evangelize” or “convert”
others to her new position]: and he did eat
[Necessity]…And Adam and his wife hid
themselves from the presence of the Lord God
[Causation].
The
Science of How Diaprax Works
Thesis
Interrogation: “Unfreezing” From the
Thesis of “Pre-set” Convictions
The very first work of
dialectical praxis is the effort to
“unfreeze” you from your
“pre-set” principles of conviction. To
shake you up is the goal. To prepare the
groundwork for this process the person must be
“interrogated” regarding their inner
thoughts, in order to help the
“facilitator” in selecting questions
that will most efficiently break down your
confidence in your convictions.
An
Example: Journaling and “Women’s”
Groups
This is why, for
instance, the Bible teachers in Structure
academies are having their students do
journaling. Journaling, promoted by the Jesuits,
is a written confessional, giving the teacher
tools to undermine conviction by discovering
where the student’s gray areas are of doubt.
This is why you see “women’s” or
“men’s” church groups. The women
or men get together and discuss their family and
marital difficulties, thus giving church leaders
the knowledge of their weak areas, or gray zones,
and how to defeat them and “take them
out” when a power struggle erupts in the
church over new innovations. This happens in
marriage counseling and any “conflict
resolution” process.
“Unfreezing”
By Destroying Confidence in Your Convictions
Those who hold to their
“pre-set” convictions are declared to
be “unloving,” “maladjusted.”
They are denounced as being under a curse because
of their “unloving” spirit. Your ideas
(which have been formed by the Spirit of God in
submission to the Word) are getting in the way of
church unity. You are holding the church back
from its mission of evangelization. You are
standing up against church authority. You are
going against the authority of God vested in the
church. In the military it would be: “Your
convictions regarding the Sabbath would break
down all military discipline, and destroy the
army.” They tried [unsuccessfully] to use
that on many Sabbath keepers in World War II.
Choice
You are presented with
the need to decide: Where did you get those ideas
from? Will you hold on to convictions that are
declared to be outdated, to a concept of the
Church that you no longer see anywhere, to ideas
that seem not to fit the new environment? Are you
going to be the only person who does not
go along with the new ideas on the church board,
or in the social group, or in basic training? Are
you really going to stand up against all
the elders and pastors? Are you going to really
oppose the entire Christian world, going against
governments and church authority (Martin Luther)?
Are you really going to resist the Mark of the
Beast? Will you make a fool of yourself? Are you
going to really stand things on end? What makes
you so different?
Thus is
the soul assaulted with dialectical praxis.
Antithesis
Dialogue: The Negation of the Negation: Negating
the “Thou Shalt Nots”
Then
the process proceeds to the negation of the
negation, getting you to negate “Thou shalt
nots,” in an effort to resolve your distress
at being different, and to get you to accept a
new standard-acceptance by the group instead of
conviction based on the Word which puts you at
variance with the “group.” Group
dynamics are carefully arranged to overwhelm you
with an authority and power of your opposition,
to attempt to make you look ridiculous because of
your ideas, to make you think that you are the
only holdout, as you see all around you people
crumpling under that assault.
l page 1 l page 2 l
|
