Diaprax common thread in false movements

Whether its the gay christian movement, the emergent church movement or prosperity gospel teachings all have a common thread which has come to be known as diaprax. Dean Gotcher coined the word diaprax by merging the words dialectic and praxis. Diaprax has become a stealth force majeure in postmodern Christianity, which in turn has dramatically altered the church’s acceptance of Biblical authority. Thus, many of the issues (in particular sex based sins) in the church today are a result of the church’s move away from using scripture as its final authority.

Dean Gotcher’s book DIALECTIC AND PRAXIS:  DIAPRAX AND THE END OF THE AGES will educate you on what exactly is fueling the current war in the church over the acceptance of sin. Diaprax is a worldy concept imported into the church via the equality, tolerance and diversity ideologies.

This attitude goes back beyond the garden experience of Adam and Eve and, as you will see, “justifies” itself according to a particular “scientific” way of thinking. 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. The answer to the world’s problems, according to those who worship this process, is not found in maturity, but is instead found in adolescence—not found in what “is,” nor found in what “ought to be,” but is instead found in the combination of the two: “potential.”

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. Whether promoted by organizations such as the NEA, the local Chamber of Commerce, the United Nations, United Nations Education, Science, and Culture Organization (UNESCO), or through grant programs such as Goals 2000 and School To Work this process is having a direct effect upon all our lives. Researchers across America are now warning us about the danger of these programs. 

This combined process of dialectic and praxis is a highly speculative way of behaving, thinking, and acting. It depends on an attitude of compromise by all participants on a general social issue producing tolerance toward ambiguity. It seeks a collaborative effort in overcoming differences in an effort to find agreement on personal-social relationship needs (group consensus). It regards the resolution of personal-social relationship needs through the use of human-reasoning skills, or HOTS, as most important. It helps in determining what is the “best” or “most rational” solution to personal-social relationship needs. This does not mean that the solution agreed upon should be “fact” or “truth” (absolute), only that it is acceptable to all as a possible solution that could or should be tried relative feelings toward ambiguous facts.

As Gotcher points out, the success of diaprax depends on collaborative agreements of unity based on false standards. Diaprax by nature would reject the absolutes of the scriptures. We are seeing a lot of that in today’s church. For a wealth of research information on diaprax visit The Authority Research.

Related:

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Diaprax common thread in false movements

  1. So then, diaprax seeks a unity apart from the unity of the Holy Spirit, right?Through the use of diaprax, unity is achieved in everyone feeling comfortable and not convicted. I always knew the distinction between true unity and social unity, but I didn’t know what to call it. I just always had a problem with Christians having social campaigns but neglecting to preach Jesus Christ. This social oneness is a false unity reminiscent of the tower of babel.

  2. Very true!

    The gospel of Jesus Christ is polarizing dividing even families. Christian unity is only based on our shared acceptance of the King’s words, goals and commandments!

    When we include other people into the equation who have no intentions of obeying Christ’s commands we are injecting poison into the body.

    Thats why there people are always accusing us of being divisive by pointing out those who cause divisions through disobedience. Their goal is to “get along” (a false peace) with everybody which isnt the goal of Christ. This false peace is accomplish only when we compromise the word of the Lord.

    The word of God is our sword. And we are to use it skillfully and when necessary to accomplish the mission of Christ.


    “Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it.” (Matthew 10:34-39 NASB)

    Jesus did not advocate physical violence and neither do we, his statement was in reference to spiritual warfare with spiritual weapons.

    Charles Crosby, a UK minister said “This sword is not literal, so what kind of sword are we talking about? Well for a start it’s a very sharp sword and it is two edged which means however one wields it, it cuts and it cuts deep drawing much metaphorical blood, especially the blood of those called, but of unbelief. This means it hurts and causes much inner pain to those on the receiving end of it. How do we know this? We know it because they respond and they respond in various negative ways. Often, the first reaction is silence; the Sword of Truth usually silences those who are opposed to it. The next reaction is varied depending upon the individual. Some will argue endlessly if you let them, but in the main they all have one thing in common – hate. They all hate The Truth and eventually will attempt to kill the messenger of The Truth.”

  3. “will attempt to kill the messenger of The Truth.”
    Thanks and well said. One of my prayers has been to stand in the face of any opposition, even the threat of death. I think of Stephen who spoke in such a way that the truth of the message could not be refuted, so they killed him.
    I have been telling some friends that this is why Obama is so dangerous. He wants this false unity by dialoguing with pastors to change their beliefs about homosexuality. He supports a woman’s right to choose. OMG, now I’m really beginning to get this. In order to support the right to choose, you have to start with a few false premises: that life begins outside the womb, that viability determines life ( the ABILITY to survive determining whether it should exist), that the unborn is a part of the woman’s body, that it is her body and she can do what she wants to do with it. Throw in rape (this horrible thing happened to me, I can’t look at this child) and what-ifs (they may end up in foster care) and you have reasoned your way to being pro-abortion. Notice that the Word of God is not consulted in this dialogue.

Comments are closed.