Genesis 3: 1-7 says "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast
of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman,
Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
2. And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of
the trees of the garden:
3. But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden,
God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest
ye die.
4. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5. 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.
6. 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, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto
her husband with her; and he did eat.
7. And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they
were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves
aprons."

God as the Father figure, the authority, told Adam and Eve that they
could eat of any tree in the garden except they must not eat of the
fruit of one tree. Lucifer who is subtle, or deceptive, practiced a
form of the dialectic on Eve. The dialectic challenges the authority
of God, and points man toward the fufillment of the flesh. By flesh
is not meant sex in this text, because God did not tell Adam and Eve
not to have sex. As long as man and woman have sex within the
structure God has provided for that, it is not sinful. But we have to
conform to that structure. Flesh is man's self, which includes his
self-esteem, pride and lust of the eyes. "For all that is in the
world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride
of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." I John 2: 16 The
lust of the flesh includes the pleasure of eating, etc.

Lucifer, acting as the "facilitator," moved Eve out of her obedience
to God's absolute moral commandment not to eat of this one tree, and
she then saw that the tree was pleasant to her eyes, that the tree was
good for food, for the pleasure of eating and wanted to become wise by
eating its fruit. She developed a relationship with the tree, and
Satan, the "facilitator," moved her to put that relationship above her
relationship with God, which included her obedience to God. Ol Adam,
because he had a relationship with Eve, though he knew better that to
eat the fruit, followed her and ate it also. Satan moved Eve and then
Adam following her, from the paradigm of absolute truth and absolute
morality to the paradigm of relationships, to man's pleasure in his
flesh (which includes self-esteem), and to opinions and feelings.

In Genesis 3 God confronted Adam and Eve about their disobedience to
him. "And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art
thou?
10. And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid,
because I was naked; and I hid myself.
11. And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten
of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?
12. And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she
gave me of the tree, and I did eat.
13. And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou
hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.
14. And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done
this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the
field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the
days of thy life:
15. And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between
thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise
his heel." Genesis 3: 9-15

The devil also tried to use his subtle methods of attitude and belief
change on Jesus Christ. Matthew 4: 1-12 tells the story of Satan's
attempt to change the paradigm of Christ: "Then was Jesus led up of
the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.
2. And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was
afterward an hungred.
3. And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of
God, command that these stones be made bread.
4. But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by
bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of
God.
5. Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him
on a pinnacle of the temple,
6. And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down:
for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee:
and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash
thy foot against a stone.
7. Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt
the Lord thy God.
8. Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain,
and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
9. And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou
wilt fall down and worship me.
10. Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is
written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou
serve.
11. Then the devil leaveth him......."

The devil's dialectic did not work on Jesus. His response was "It is
written," meaning what God has inspired holy men to write is absolute
and not subject to compromise, and movement toward being mere
opinions.

But now with the falling away of II Thessalonians 2: 3-4 and the
leavening of the churches of Luke 13: 21 well underway, Lucifer has
led many into that paradigm shift from seeing truth and morality as
absolute into seeing them as opinions and feelings of man's flesh, the
sarx, which includes pride, reliance on appearances, envy, hate, and
violence. The desire of Christian Zionists to go to war against the Islamics could be an expression of this "sarx," which includes the desire to kill others.

Dean Gotcher has been exposing this paradigm shift and the use of the
dialectic for years.

http://authorityresearch.com/File Dean Gotcher/Audio Dean Gotcher/ADORNO/Theodor Adorno.htm

Dean Gotcher has a sixteen part series of audios of his lectures on
Theodor W. Adorno. Adorno, a key member of the Frankfurt School, posed
as a social and personality psychologist and wrote his highly
influential book, The Authoritarian Personality (1950), while he was a
professor at Berkeley. Using the Hegelian dialectic, Adorno claimed
that the strong family and Christianity cause fascism. But in saying
that the family and Christianity cause fascism, to those who believed
him, Adorno was really moving them toward Marxism.

In fact, this entire movement into transformational Marxism originated
in the atheism of Marx, Freud and other 19th century Western
intellectuals. Since there is no God, they thought, everything is
permitted. Much of contemporary atheism is really from
transformational Marxism. Some atheists don't know they have been
influenced by Marxism.

What Dean Gotcher has been talking about for years is not limited to
the dialectic as a deceptive method of attitude and belief change.
What Gotcher is talking about in his many audios on the Internet is a
paradigm shift - the shift is away from believing that truth and
morality is absolute - "it is written" - to a paradigm in which we
have opinions which can be shifted by clever "facilitators" who know
how to use the dialectic, and to the emphasis upon feelings as man's
authentic "self" (Carl Rogers. Gotcher also has a series of lectures
on "Uncle" Carl Rogers, once one of my professors at Wisconsin. I was
one of the research assistants under Rogers at one time, not because I
was a clinical major, but because I was an experimental major and had
an interest then in the theories of Carl Rogers.

Adorno and others of the Frankfurt School, such as Erick Fromm, and
Herbart Marcuse, all of whom Gotcher has lectures on, were
transformational Marxists, that is, mostly non-violent Marxists. Carl
Rogers was not a member of the Frankfurt School, but became a change
agent who had a lot in common with the members of the Frankfurt
School. Abraham Maslow was also not part of the German Frankfurt
School, but as a psychologist was an important change agent like Carl
Rogers. Maslow's main book was Motivation and Personality,1954,1970,
1987. In it he included a study of what he thought were highly
creative people. But I was impressed that he did not include Frank
Lloyd Wright as one of his "self-actualizers." Maslow may have had an
agenda in selecting his "self-actualizers," not to include one of
America's most creative and innovative architects, who was also one of
our greatest artists.

We might date the beginning of the paradigm shift away from absolute
truth and morality much earlier than 1950, with the publication of
Adorno's The Authoritarian Personality. But the attack upon absolute
truth and morality really got going in America with the 1950 book of
Adorno et al, from their stronghold at Berkeley, California.

Transformational Marxism and the dialectic got going in the early
fifties and influenced the counterculture of the sixties and
seventies. The Baby Boomers, born after 1946 (to about 1964) were the
first generation in which almost all members of that age group
experienced some degree of influence from transformational Marxism,
from the Red Horse of Revelation 6: 4. Transformational Marxism has
been called "political correctness," as well as "cultural Marxism."

The hippies and the drug movement as the core parts of the counterculture were anti-Christian. This anti-Christian attitude fits in with Adorno's agenda to weaken Christianity in the U.S. There were movements associated with the counterculture in the late sixties and during the seventies which not only opposed Christianity but opposed the family. That which opposes the family would fit in with Adorno's agenda. The New Age Occult movement had some connection with the counterculture, though it had origins that go back earlier than the sixties. And - the homosexual and lesbian movements associated in the seventies with the counterculture certainly opposed the family.

Self psychology was also allied with the counterculture and it came right out of Adorno and transformational Marxism. The art bohemian movement, which had roots back in the 19th century, in surrealism of the early 20th century and in New York City abstract expressionism was also linked to the counterculture to some extent. It too opposed Christianity and the family.

The fact that the Baby Boomers were the first generation to come under
strong influence of the transformational Marxists does not mean that
the generations born before 1946 have not also been under some
influence from this form of Red Horse Marxism. Some people older than
the Baby Boomers have become stronger followers of transformational
Marxism and the dialectic than other people from the older
generations.

But the older generations can remember a time when two plus two was
always four. In George Orwell's novel 1984, O'Brien, the
"facilitator", is trying to indoctrinate Winston with the Party's
dialectic and is trying to shift Winston's reality, what he sees as
being true and moral. O'Brien said that two plus two is not always four, but can be some other number.

And so a politician like Ron Paul, who is not a Baby Boomer, would be
a threat to the powers that be. Many who are older than the Baby
Boomers can remember back before the early fifties when truth and
morality were more absolute and God's word was "it is written," and
the word brought spiritual life.

The dialectic as an attitude and belief change procedure depends upon
the individual being part of a group, with whom he or she has a
relationship. Someone in the role of the facilitator (as in encounter
groups, but the group does not have to be a face to face one)
interacts verbally with the target person and tries to move him or her
away from absolute truth and/or absolute morality. Group acceptance
of the target person is used as a reward for shifting positions, and
group rejection of "wrong" positions of the target person act as
punishment. Dean Gotcher talks about the neurotransmitter dopamine,
which is a reward system in the brain, as being involved in the
pleasure of a relationship. Any relationship that the target person is in
can be used by the facilitator to move the person away from absolutes.