- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostA La Carte (06/28)
- Next Post »A La Carte (06/29)
Counterfeit Detection (Part 2)
- 06/28/06
- 11
I wrote yesterday about my experience at the Bank of Canada as I was taught to distinguish between genuine and counterfeit currency. As promised, today I will provide a few brief applications, though I still have much to think about and reflect upon. I do intend to write more formally about this subject at a later time. I went to this meeting looking particularly for parallels between spiritual discernment and the task of discerning counterfeit currency. I was not disappointed. The parallel between these two disciplines is unavoidable. In this article I am going to draw attention to just a few of these.
I was surprised to learn that the Bank of Canada expects all Canadians to exercise discernment with their currency. Despite having exchanged currency countless thousands of times, it had never occurred to me that I ought to be verifying each bill. I had never been told so. While I consider myself a person who values discernment, I had to admit that I had no discernment when it comes to currency and I could easily have been fooled. The literature the bank produces and the message they attempt to convey says “Check your notes! Make it a habit!” We are expected to check each piece of currency that comes into our possession. And clearly, if every person in the country was equipped to discern genuine from fraudulent, and if every person was to verify every piece of currency that came into his possession, all counterfeit money would be eradicated, as would the livelihoods of those who produce it.
Why is it so important that I check each piece of currency? Because once I accept a bill, that piece of money becomes my responsibility. Should I attempt to later deposit this bill in a bank and should the teller find that it is counterfeit, the bill will be confiscated and I will not be reimbursed. What I accept becomes my responsibility. Now there is a difference between taking a bill and accepting a bill. I have the right to inspect and refuse any piece of currency. But once I accept that money, I am responsible for it.
There is a clear parallel here to spiritual discernment. Just as I am responsible for money I accept and later attempt to spend, in the same way I am responsible for the teachings I accept and later attempt to share with others. Thus it is my responsibility before God to inspect every teaching that comes my way. I should test each teaching that is presented to me, refusing to accept any that go against the plain teaching of Scripture. There are tests the Bible provides which will help us discern truth from error. 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22 exhorts all Christians to “test everything; hold fast to what is good. Abstain from every form of evil.” We are first to test, then abstain, and finally hold fast.
Yesterday I mentioned the phrase, “touch, tilt, look through, look at” as a filter through which I can pass a particular piece of currency. These represent four exercises which will draw my attention to the marks of a genuine piece of currency. Similarly, the Bible provides a series of tests we can use to discern truth from error. I have much reflection to do in this area, but I would suggest some good filters we can apply in the spiritual realm are: examining Scripture, seeking the counsel of godly men and women, and seeking the consensus of historic Christianity.
A parallel commonly used by authors and preachers, is that, like experts in counterfeit currency, a person who wishes to be discerning must focus more on what is genuine than what is counterfeit. Before handing me a stack of bills and asking me to sort through them to discern which were fraudulent and which were genuine, Monica taught me about real currency. Having done that, the differences between good and bad were immediately apparent. In the same way, Christians, and even those with a particular gifting or interest in discernment, should focus more on truth than error. The more we understand what is true, the easier it will be to identify what is fraudulent. The more we know about God’s character, God’s ways, and God’s Word, the greater the contrast will be between truth and error.
Monica taught me the defining characteristics of a genuine bill. There were certain markers she told me to look for: fine-line printing, raised print, holographs, watermarks, and the like. By focusing on these markers, most of which are are difficult to duplicate and are thus missing from counterfeit bills, I was able to make quick but confident judgments. A point she conveyed several times is that counterfeiters usually only put in a minimal effort. They seek to make a copy of the original that is only good enough to pass a cursory inspection. Sadly, most people rarely even consider that a piece of currency may be fraudulent and thus are fooled even by the most pathetic effort at duplicating money. It struck me that most Christians are unaware of their responsibility to test doctrine. And yet most false doctrine is remarkably simple to detect and avoid, for it often is built around minimal effort in undermining truth.
While a single twenty dollar bill has a variety of security features, the Bank of Canada does not expect every person to inspect every one of these features. Rather, they suggest that every person choose two or three features and focus on those ones. This keeps the task of inspecting a bill from becoming burdensome. Still, because of the minimal effort expended by counterfeiters, verifying only two of the security features will usually be enough to discern whether a bill is genuine or fraudulent. If inspecting two does not provide enough information, a person can verify the others as well.
A short time ago, the Canadian media focused a great deal of attention on the so-called “Windsor $100 bill.” Several fraudulent $100 bills had been removed from circulation in the Windsor area, but the media attention made it seem as if these counterfeit bills had flooded the nation. Multitudes of stores across the nation immediately refused to accept $100 bills and even today a great many stores refuse to accept any bill higher than $50. Yet there were only a very small number of these false $100 bills and the amount of media attention was completely unwarranted. Fully eighty percent of counterfeit money is in the $10 and $20 dollar denominations, and in recent months there have been a growing number of counterfeit $5 bills in circulation. While many people were worried about fraudulent $100 bills, many $5’s, $10’s and $20’s were no doubt slipping through unnoticed. We see a similar situation in the church. It is quite rare that we are presented with fraudulent teaching that contradicts the most important teachings of Scripture. More often we are faced with issues of lesser importance than the major tenets of the faith. If we look only for false doctrine that contradicts the first-order doctrines, we may allow countless lesser errors slip through.
I went to the Bank of Canada to learn about currency, but learned a great deal about spiritual discernment. It was a valuable exercise and I am grateful to have had the opportunity to learn about spiritual discernment in so unlikely a place.

I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at
Releasing on April 1, The Next
Comments (11)
This has been fantastic Tim. I am hoping to pass this lesson along to our Sunday School teacher and pastor. Thanks for the great job you did.
“More often we are faced with issues of lesser importance than the major tenets of the faith. If we look only for false doctrine that contradicts the first-order doctrines, we may allow countless lesser errors slip through.”
Great point here Tim. One sad observation I have made is that a lot of Christians do know of these smaller errors and let them pass in because they do not want conflict, or they feel they are dividing the brethren. Problem is, once you let this happen these small errors make way for the bigger, and you end up with something that does not resemble Christianity at all.
Tim, what a good job on this! I receive and let go of cash without ever looking at it, never even think about whether it’s real or not. What a perfect analogy to discerning spiritual things. A lot of apllicable and thought-provoking details.
Thanks for drawing this to people’s attention… you’ve expressed very helpful some of the vital lessons I learnt in my time working as a bank clerk
Wow, there were some great analogies in this experience - thanks so much for sharing them.
I think this nugget is something every Christian blogger should think long and hard about:
“Just as I am responsible for money I accept and later attempt to spend, in the same way I am responsible for the teachings I accept and later attempt to share with others. Thus it is my responsibility before God to inspect every teaching that comes my way.”
In fact, I’ve thought about that before based on James 3:1 and it scares me a bit. I’m glad to see you address a similar idea here.
These are all great lessons, thanks again.
Tim,
These were great posts! This is, I think, the nexus of the problem in the evangelical church at the beginning of the 21st century.
However your line at the end of the next to last paragraph raises concerns:
“It is quite rare that we are presented with fraudulent teaching that contradicts the most important teachings of Scripture. More often we are faced with issues of lesser importance than the major tenets of the faith. If we look only for false doctrine that contradicts the first-order doctrines, we may allow countless lesser errors slip through.”
Who decides what is minor error and what is major error and what is not error, but mere distinctives?
Some examples of issues for instance:Style of worship—liturgical, charismatic or baptist/free church?Church polity—episcopal, presbyterian or congregational?Atonement—limited, unlimited, 4.5 points?Women in ministry (a hot button lately)—yes, no or in certain situations?Bible translation philosophy—literal, dynamic, paraphrase?Hermeneutics—allegorical, dispensational, covenantal, neo-orthodox, Jesus Seminar (just to name a range of possibilities)?Baptismal theology—paedo or credo?
All of those have been places where error has been proclaimed and discernment used to separate wheat and chaff according to the proponents of various views. Obviously some of these are more important than others, and clearly some are in error, but who decides?
If we only use our discernment to decide what is or is not a contradiction of Scripture, we will soon leave historical theology, as well as the received tradition of centuries of believers, in the dust. Your suggestion:
“some good filters we can apply in the spiritual realm are: examining Scripture, seeking the counsel of godly men and women, and seeking the consensus of historic Christianity”
is good. As is your comment,
“The more we know about God’s character, God’s ways, and God’s Word, the greater the contrast will be between truth and error.”
My concern is that we increasingly uphold our recent teaching and preferences while neglecting the right teaching and practice that has preceded us for literally centuries. We then use our personal preferences as a bludgeon of discernment against those whose personal preferences are completely different from our own.
So then who decides the issue? If we are all left to our discernment, we will increasingly splinter and fragment the witness of the Church Militant that should be one Spirit, one Lord, one Father and one faith. My apologies for the length and the eye strain in reading these thoughts.
BTW this is not an argument for RC or Eastern Orthodoxy, but it is food for thought for those of us trying to stay humble in our teaching and preferences in practice.
Nice post Tim. And great questions from Mike S.
I guess the base line we are looking for is, if you are identifying the conterfeit by become very familiar with the real thing, we better be darn sure the Real Thing really is the Real Thing. Otherwise, we could be tossing “counterfeits” b/c they don’t match our counterfeits.
Dang, that sounded better in my head. :)
intersting stuff, makes me think of the movie catch me if you can, when dicaprio at the end can instantly identify things on forgeries that the feds cannot, because while they are trained to know the real thing, and can identify a forgery, they don’t know the hows of forgery.dicaprio’s character, as a forger, can give them clues about the process used that helps them track the criminal… i guess that kind of takes the analogy to another step. not really sure if there’s anything to learn from that.
Chris, that’s a good point too about the forger’s experience. When a forger “comes good” and starts working for the feds, he has the experience of falsehood but now has the correct attitude.
All analogies fall down somewhere… perhaps this one falls down with the forger himself - he knows that what he is doing is wrong (he is deliberately misrepresenting the truth, if you will); whereas many false teachers are teaching what they do out of ignorance, rather than malice.
It would be a lot easier to spot counerfeit bills if the government didn’t keep changing them all the time—along with numerous variations of each style.
The Gospel stays the same-God satys the same.
Only once in a great while do I get the privilege to read a great article. This is a great article. Thanks!
Great post. It was a focus on truth and doctrine that allowed me to discern, but what happens to be is that I start to spent more time looking at error than truth at times. This is one of the reasons that I am going to be setting down my formal attack on MLM. After all, I alread said about all that can be said: They tend to rely on Faith-Movement, are poor stewards of thier money, and totally shunned by society in a very merited way!
Thanks for the post, It was a good motivator to get back to the truth.