Ever hear the one about counterfeit money? [Heads nodding] Remember, 'You don't study counterfeit money to figure out what it looks like; you study real money.' This illustration is typical of the thought-stopping mechanisms in place for the Society's usage. It's an illustration that's full of holes.
Because in our case, assuming Christianity is the issue here, we have a guidebook which helps us recognize what is counterfeit and what is not--the Bible. Now, the reality is that if we submit to 'theocratic direction', it works like this:
A man takes the guidebook from you and declares himself the only one on earth capable of properly understanding it. He then gives you what he calls real money. Sometime later, he returns, informing you that some of the money he gave you is actually counterfeit, not real. "Sorry, that's counterfeit," he says. "Here's some real money to replace it." He does this many times. Eventually, one would begin to wonder, ooookay, can this person really read the guidebook properly? If he can, why does he seem so unable to identify counterfeit money? Worse yet, why does he continue to promote counterfeit money as if it were real? Realizing that something is amiss, you then decide to study the guidebook yourself, independent of his logic.
Angrily, the man returns and takes the guidebook from you. "I'm the one who decides what is real and what is counterfeit, not you! How dare you challenge my authority?" He then proceeds to continue in the same routine as before, giving you what he says is real money, then returning again and again to tell you it was actually counterfeit.
Clearly, something is very wrong here, isn't it? This man has sent you out repeatedly with counterfeit money! If you do business with it, you could go to jail! But when you confront him about it, he acts as if it is irrelevant. Obviously it is, as he is immune from direct consequences. If anyone asks, he'll just say you came up with counterfeit money on your own--he always gave you real money.
So...since I got hit with this illogical illustration somewhat recently, I thought I might share my analysis of it with you all. Borg cubes are coming my way quite soon, so...figure I might take time to enjoy my pre-DF'd moments while they last.
Excellent thoughts on a ridiculous analogy. It also completely ignores the fact that if all you are ever allowed to be aware of is the one type of money, then you can't possibly know for certain that you haven't accepted as true what is in actuality false.
Another classic showcasing WT (il)logic is the "tacking" sailing analogy.
Ha, ha! Very good illustration, Sd-7! You are definitely a bright guy.
I think bank tellers are allowed to study both real and fake money side by side, so they can tell which is real and which is fake. Usually, when there is fake money circulating, they will want to know what it looks like compared to real money, so they can spot it at once and remove it from circulation.
Also, real money has to stay relatively constant for a long period of time. You will see color shifting numbers, red and blue threads, special paper, security threads, and watermarks on the real thing. Fake money is often blurry, lacks watermarks or has the wrong ones, or has no color shifting ink. These are very obvious things most bank tellers look for--if it is blurry or the watermarks are not consistent with the printed denominations, it is probably fake.
With the religion, it is not so clear cut. They give you some of the signs, and then they twist the definitions of words to fit their current needs. For instance, "a generation" is so blatantly fake that most householders should easily be able to see it. And, when they don't actually do what they claim they do, that is another blatant sign of a fake. Plus, unlike most money, it is only good until the next batch comes out. I still have bank notes from the 1990s, and they are still as good as they were when they were printed. ($50 and $100 bills are most likely to last through several printings.) The washtowel religion, however, is classified as "fake" if the next batch gets printed.
Good observation, WTWizard. Your analysis adds further credence to just how full of holes that illustration really was. Hmm.
The other illustration that made me laugh as soon as I heard it was the one about the dented pie dish,or whatever, that every pie would have the same dent in it. trying to show how "imperfection" was passed on in some kind of genetic way from Adam on.
Of course they would claim genetics doesn't work that way when discussing Evolution.
The silly thing is too, that if "imperfection" were merely a genetic defect, then man's engineering could eradicate it, no need for a sacrifice from Jesus.
What a load of tossers, they cannot even think.
I remember reading that the notion about evolution is that man dies for LEGAL/MORAL reasons rather than reasons that can be biologically determined. But how do you pass on legal death to your kids, exactly? They didn't eat from the tree.
I actually did think of sin as being genetic, to be honest; I never thought about that. But it can't be genetic because man would eventually figure out how to fix the problem. Hmm. I see your point, Wobble. Evolution can't happen genetically, yet sin can. That is a bit of a paradox, isn't it?
Evolution is a subject I've not yet explored. If it's legitimate, it would present a whole new array of issues--and I'm a little busy for that...but this has been a useful discussion, though.