Listening to the audio of the segment of resolutions re: the Bible Translation issue was enlightening only to confirm how methodically the dialectic process management has permeated WELS since it adopted the PPBS (management by objectives system) in late 1960's. Where have the serious pastors and laymen been for the forty six years they have failed to recognize what has been done unto them and allowed themselves to be manipulated.
When the agenda to get rid of the KJV began in earnest, the scenario was first to convince laypeople that 20th Century readers were incapable of understanding the KJV. Then came the questionnaires designed to foster agreement with that premise. The planners and programmers having destroyed confidence in KJV as a vehicle to reach the unchurched with the Word., the process (and it is a managed process) began to convince WELS members that any other translation would be better than KJV, so using any or all of them out there was encouraged. Bible classes became exercises in asking, "what does your bible say?" instead of "Thus saith the Lord". When that planned phase of obfuscation had run it's course, the process of facilitating to acceptance of one (anything but KJV) translation was necessary. NIV was the choice of the planners and the programmers, and the pastors and laymen followed without a whole lot of ripples. The strongest objectors had long since been removed or departed. That is called identifying objectors and removing same. It's all explained in books and training manuals for change agents to operate in any segment or society or organization.
A couple generations have now been raised on NIV, and can only argue from the NIV platform in relation to the even worse NNIV. Until WELS pastors and laypeople understand the Hegelian Dialectic Process, they will never grasp what has been done and continues to be done unto them.
It is a PROCESS with identifying terminology. I was struck by the mention of a next phase taking five to seven years. Doesn't anyone remember the old Soviet Union's ongoing five year plans? Anyone who has observed or is involved with managing by objectives is very familiar with five to seven year plans as the process grinds to what has already been decided to be accepted. That is why it is called PROCESS.
It operates in, under and around the show of resolutions at conferences with delegates unable or unwilling to think for themselves and do some homework which would reveal what they don't want to know.
***
GJ - The same process was used to close down Northwestern College, a move as unpopular as promoting the New NIV. Everyone got to vote, and they hated the idea. They kept pushing the idea until people stopped resisting. When the WELS leaders in charge flipped the actual results, because the amalgamation vote actually failed at the convention, no one objected and the election committee was too chicken to tell the truth. The districts had to ratify this illegal move, and they stood mute while Gurgle said it would only cost $8 million, or they would pull the plug. But the contracts were already signed, Gurgle said, and they could not stop. So they were "voting" on nothing. It was a done deal as soon as the election committee rolled over and played dead.
One can blame the process factories or blame the sheep that volunteer their millions each year to go through this charade.
Gurgle was supposedly told to resign. Schroeder was going to fix things, but he is even more of an enabler than Gurgle was.
ChurchMouse has written about Diaprax.
