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.
