Sorry Daryl, your analogy is incorrect... which then makes your conclusion also partially incorrect.

Yes... we need to study the "genuine". And our knowledge of this is what will prepare us to recognize the "counterfeit" when we see it. But as for your analogy... it would fit much more accurately if it reflected actual life practice.

Yes, so long as there are no known counterfeit bills floating around, a professional money-handler's experience is with genuine money... and they learn both from the "feel" and from what they are taught about the specific things contained on the genuine which are the most difficult... or impossible... for a counerfeiter to copy.

BUT.... when someone notices a counterfeit bill.... things change... and change dramatically.... Here is an real life true account of how they are handled in one city which, because of its location and attraction to the "monied crowds" is also extra attractive to counterfeiters.

When such a bill is found, usually in a bank... the bank officials take the bill... photo copy it... enlarge it... and circle each of the most easily detectable details that show it to be counterfeited. Then a meeting of all employees who handle money is called, the bill is passed around among them so they can see it for themselves... at the same time that the enlarged copy is projected and explained for all to see.

The next step is to scatter copies of the enlarged and marked bill to every bank teller and cash register in the whole town.... so that everyone who handles money... whether they be an experienced clerk of ancient vintage, or temporary teen their first day on the job... can have this clearly marked counterfeit bill before them as they accept money ... either for "change" or for purchase of an object.

If we were to extend THIS analogy to false teachings and false teachers there would be some accurate transferrence from it to our situation of genuine and false doctrines. And it would enable us to more accurately evaluate what you quote below.


But your analogy does not stand. In this case Christ is identifying one "mark" of a "counterfeit" which we could use to determine whether a particular message was correct or not. In this case, the true was given in a previous verse, which was the manner of Christ's coming.... instantaneously visible from East to West with every eye being able to see him simultaneously. In contrast, there would be those who CLAIMED to be Christ and who CLAIMED to have already returned... but they would be in some secret "chambers" or remote place. In that case the admonition was to not follow them... to not believe them... all on the basis of their teachings... that they were "the Christ".

I do not think it correct to extend this generalized warning to not "follow them" nor "believe" them so far as to say not to learn what other false doctrines they were teaching so as to warn others against THOSE falsities as well as warning against their basic error.

This isn't saying that only certain ones should discover and study, but that it is essential that some of us should be doing this.

It is open for whoever feels impressed to do this. If that is everybody, then that is OK and great, however, it is essential that at least some of us do this sort of thing.

In regards to the genuine over the counterfeit, when it comes to money, there is more than one type of counterfeit money, just as there is more than one type of counterfeit anything else.

Christ referred to the sheep knowing the shepherd's voice in that we as His sheep should also know the Shepherd's voice. Christ is our Shepherd. We are His sheep. If we know the voice of the genuine Shepherd, then there's no way we can be deceived by the voice of any false shepherd, by any false Christ.

I, therefore, continue to say that we need to know and study the true as our best defence in not being deceived by the false, by the counterfeit.

We should also examine any voice we hear and compare it to the voice of the one we know, but how do we do this?

In line with the reason for the existence of this topic, how do we know that these so-called interviews are not true?

Daryl, you wrote that we should examine any voice we hear and compare it to the voice of the one we know, but when your wife calls you, you do not need to do any examination. You recognise that it is her imediately. Is it not so?
We examine the voices we recognise but cant quite put a name or face to right away.
Why I believe the interviews have nothing to do with Gods truth, when I read them I could see nothing that resonated with what I have previously learned about truth and I got nothing but a bad feeling about them.

Yes, I obviously know my wife's voice when I hear it simply because I heard her voice many, many times, however, I have never heard the audible voice of Jesus Christ, therefore, when something is said to have come from Him, seeing I never heard His voice even once, let alone many times, I need to examine what was said to be certain what was said truly came from Him.