The Dialectic Mind of Our Age of Deception

The Dialectic Mind of Our Age of Deception

On http://www.crossroad...tic-gotcher.htm
Dean Gotcher says "God cannot speak into the pre-flood, Tower of
Babel, Sodom and Gomorrah, dialectic mind..."

The dialectic mind is one which does not receive the truth of God's
word in scripture. It is a mind which will try to discredit, disprove
and reject the absolute truth of God. It often does so in a deceptive
way. "Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field the
Lord God had made." Genesis 3: 1

Love of the truth is not in the dialectic mind. "And with all
deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they
received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that
they should believe a lie:
12. That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but
had pleasure in unrighteousness." II Thessalonians 2: 10-12

Since the dialectic mind wants to overthrow the truth, that which is
of faith, and the mind which believes God, the dialectic mind does not
love Christ, who himself is the Truth. " I am the way, the truth, and
the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14: 6

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God:
for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because
they are spiritually discerned." I Corinthians 2: 14

The dialectic mind does not receive the word of God which is inspired
by the Holy Spirit. In fact, the dialectic mind tries to find subtle
ways of showing that a position or doctrine that comes from faith in
the word is wrong. So the dialectic mind is the natural mind which
sees the truth of God as "foolishness."

Christ does not speak into the dialectic mind of carnal man. The
dialectic mind does not receive the Spirit, nor does Christ put his
mind into man's dialectic mind. "Let this mind be in you, which was
also in Christ Jesus." Philippians 2: 5

"To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this
mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of
glory." Colossians 1 27

"There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ
Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Romans 8:
1

The dialectic mind walks after the flesh, not after the Spirit. It is
mired in the flesh by the dialectic; it cannot have the mind of Christ
in it. The dialectic mind starts from man's reasoning and goes farther
away from God into the process of debate. In using subtle ways of
debating against the truth of scripture, the dialectic mind moves far
away from God.

When the majority of people, including those in the Christian churches,
develop the dialectic mind, they become conformed to it, and go into a kind of hive mind
as described by Mack White of Austin, Texas.
When a great many, even a majority, in the churches have the
dialectic mind, then the "church" itself has a dialectic mind.
Gotcher cites Jeremiah 2: 13, ""For my people have committed two
evils; they have forsaken me the fountain of living waters, and hewed
them out cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water."

"Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and
that ye receive not of her plagues." Revelation 18: 4

"Her" refers back to Revelation 17: 1-11, the beast which is false
religion, Mystery Babylon the Great. In Revelation 17: 11 this beast
is physical Israel in apostasy and also the Christian church after it
has been leavened (Luke 13: 21), and the falling away has happened.
"And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of
the seven, and goeth into perdition." The church beast was in number
seven, the rest of God (Hebrews 4: 1-11), but rebelled against God,
rejecting his truth, and went into number eight, a mingling of that
which is of God with that which is of man, of man's values and of
man's reasoning.

The habitual use of the dialectic creates the dialectic mind of our
age of deception.

On http://www.crossroad...tic-gotcher.htm
Gotcher teaches that "The dialectic is man thinking through his
feelings. This is the reason God flooded the world and will judge the
world again. "And as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also
in the days of the Son of man." (Luke 17:26) Paul had it correct when
he said "Let God be true, but every man a liar." (Romans 3:4) The
dialectic paradigm rejects the word of God as the final authority. It
turns to fables and the opinions of men. You do not dialogue truth,
you teach truth, you dialogue compromise. [p.10]

The key to dialectic thinking is the right to question, mock, and
ridicule the traditional, didactic, patriarch authority paradigm. The
facilitator's agenda is to create and sustain such an environment. The
very right to question the role of traditional authority has an effect
on all participating in such surroundings. All but the strongest in
faith are drawn by "the feeling of group belongingness" to trust and
follow the facilitator. All who surrender to the "group feel" will
harass those who question the facilitator's "authority." Persecution
is being harassed for holding to a position. The experience can be
quite heated. [p.128]

The facilitator must gain and maintain control of the meeting to
create and sustain the environment of transition (dark circled area
below.) If the facilitator can not keep control of the meeting he must
close it or traditional/ didactic leadership will limit or remove the
transitional condition. "

Dean Gotcher has another online article on the dialectic at:
http://www.professio...ak/diaprax1.htm

Here he says that "This work is about this New Age way of thinking,
the dialectic, and its environment of deceit and manipulation, called
praxis. This way of thinking is currently being used in education,
business, and politics around the world."
"This "new" way of thinking is taking control of America, as well as
the rest of the world, through its use in education, business,
politics, and religion."
"In the spring issue of Education Record (1994), Bill Clinton stated:
"For life-long learning to become a reality, a whole new ethic will
have to grip the American imagination."
This new ethic is based upon the dialectic way of thinking,
experienced in praxis. This new ethic is even being used to unite the
Church, changing the Church's focus and convincing it that if it is to
help save the world in the 21st century, it will have to overcome the
obstacle of Christ's second coming - God's judgment upon man's quest
for cosmic oneness and sin. Erik Fromm and other socio-psychologists
with this same new ethical mindset see Satan, not Christ, as the
deliverer of mankind, saving man by giving him an opportunity to be
equal with the creator (equality of opportunity) and allowing him to
free himself by questioning the "authoritarian"—"That's the way it
is," "Do what I say," "Because I said so," Creator who promotes a
lower order, "God said it, I believe it, and that settles it"—way of
thinking. They see Lucifer as the one who gave Adam and Eve the right
"to be their own person" and the right "to discover their full
potential." I kid you not when I tell you this is the final agenda for
the "reculturing of America."

Many people are no longer able to follow a line of thought. They focus
on particulars, tangents and "rabbit trails" rather than on the main ideas
that are presented.

Even if they are "spoon fed" a line of thought, they still may not be
able to follow it. In spoon feeding a baby, the mother may pick up bits of food
the baby has spit out and put it back in its mouth. The person who cannot
understand a line of thought may "spit some it out."

Responding to a line of thought by use of the dialectic
may be partly a result - in our dialectic culture - of the person not having the attention
span to follow it or the willingness to take the time to understand it.
However, the dialectic is also used quite often when the line of thought opposed is
understood, in order to try to change the
attitude and belief of the person who brought up that line of thought,and/or
that of others in a group.

To learn to identify the use of the dialectic in discourse, you need verbatim records of conversations illustrating its use. When one person presents an opinion, idea or piece of information, this is the "thesis." Another person may want to change that other person's position. This is then the second person's "antithesis" to the "thesis," an "anti-thesis." Or the antithesis is brought up in an effort to change a group's position by using the person who presented the thesis as an example.

Usually, with the dialectic, the "facilitator" who tries to change an opinion, perception, idea or bit of information will not immediately challenge the thesis head on. The facilitator may even begin by appearing to agree with the thesis, or will claim he agrees with it in part. Then, the facilitator side steps a head on challenge of the thesis based on fact, and challenges the thesis from the side. Sometimes this is where using one particular point, not the main point, of the thesis comes it. The facilitator will focus on one point and make it the focus of attention, in part, changing the thesis to that one point. Or, the facilitator will bring up a point that appears to be somewhat irrelevant to the thesis. Or, the facilitator will misrepresent the thesis slightly or in big way. There are other methods of using the dialectic.

Dean Gotcher emphasizes the role of acceptance by the group which the person who brings up a thesis belongs to. The dialectic works better when the person targeted wants to be accepted by the group. He may be willing to compromise his position in order to gain group acceptance. The facilitator works to crate group coherence and agreement on the issue at hand. This use of group acceptance can work also with an Internet forum, where there tends to be some agreement on positions, but there are factions also in the group, which may be in the minority. The user of the dialectic, the facilitator in the Internet forum situation, may try to appeal to the majority view against the minority view. This assumes the target person, part of the minority, or a minority of one in some cases, wants acceptance by the group, or at least wants some in the group to accept his views.

Gotcher talks a lot about the contemporary origins of the dialectic. He especially spends time in talking about the following guys in history:

Georg Friedrich Hegel (1770 – 1831)
Karl Marx (1818 – 1883)
Abraham Maslow
Carl Rogers
Irvin Yalom
Theodor Adorno
Erick Fromm
Norman O. Brown
Herbart Marcuse

Adorno and Marcuse were core members of the Frankfurt School. Fromm was similar to them
in ideology. Theodor W. Adorno, who was the senior author of the highly influential book, The Authoritian Personality (1950), posed as a social psychologist, and taught that fascism is caused by
Christianity and the strong family. The Frankfurt School, which included Wilhelm Reich on its fringes, represented what is called cultural Marxism. They set out to overthrow the major institutions of the West, especially Christianity and the family, by non-violent means, rather than by the violent means of classical Marxism. The dialectic is one important procedure in overthrowing the foundational institutions of the West.

But - the dialectic is not limited to cultural Marxism, because its use spread to the institutions of society, including the Christian church, And in the churches, the dialectic is not limited to the Rick Warren type of mega-churches, which emphasize church growth more than adherence to the Gospel.

Cultural Marxism, via the Frankfurt School, began to be spread from the major universities, especially from the University of California at Berkeley in the early fifties. Those in personality and social psychology became familiar with the Adorno book and the huge number of attitude studies that grew from it. A few years later, the cultural Marxism movement, plus Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers self psychology, spread to higher education and soon to the public school. This is where Dean Gotcher encountered the dialectic since he was in education.