The Myth of the Counterfeit Money Analogy

Christians frequently challenge me when they learn I am interested in studying non-Christian philosophies and ideas. They express concern that exposure to non-Christian thinking will lead to my accepting “secular” or “anti-Christian” beliefs. They advise that I should not examine error, but only the truth. If I would study only the Bible, I could detect error without having to dabble in it.

By Mark D. Mathewson, Ph.D.
Academic Dean, Christian Leadership College

Many of these Christians use the famous “counterfeit money analogy” (CMA) to support their argument.  I am told bank personnel are trained to detect counterfeit money by examining only authentic bills.  After countless hours of saturating themselves with the feel and sight of authentic bills, they can detect counterfeits easily.  Likewise, if I want to detect error, I should examine only the Bible.  By saturating myself with the truth, I can spot error while not exposing myself to the dangers of non-Christian thought.

CMA sounds spiritual.  Perhaps one should study only the Bible and avoid studying non-Christian thought for fear of capitulating to it.  While CMA gives an impression of piety, I think it is misguided.  By exposing its limitations, I hope to dispel the myth that CMA is appropriately applied to the Christian who takes time to study non-Christian thought.

CMA is correct in one sense.  The most effective way to detect error is to know the truth.  Christians who study their Bibles are well-equipped to spot error.  Knowing the genuine – whether a bank employee or a student of Scripture – is necessary for detecting counterfeits.  Confined to applications where the issue is the detection of error, CMA has relevance.  Beyond such contexts, the analogy unravels.

The misuse of CMA occurs when one tries to apply it to the correction of error.  Were Christians solely entrusted with detecting error, CMA would be somewhat convincing.  Yet, God has called us not merely to detect error, but correct it.

F. F. Bruce reminds us, “There are times when it is not enough to hold and expound the truth; the war must be carried into the enemy’s lines so that the error may be attacked, exposed, and refuted.”^[1]

If God requires us to offer correction for error, mere detection is insufficient.  To correct error, I need more than a knowledge of the truth; I need an understanding of the error.

Let’s reconsider the counterfeit money illustration.  First, it is simply not true that bank employees only examine authentic bills.  I have talked with bank employees who have reported to me their training included examining counterfeit money.  Second, after the bank employee detects a counterfeit, what next?  A correction is sought.  Law enforcement agents are summoned.  It is imperative that these agents have a thorough understanding of counterfeiters and counterfeiting to trace the counterfeit, track down the counterfeiters and bring them to justice.  Merely knowing what authentic money is cannot correct the problem.

The responsibility of Christians to offer a corrective for error requires that they not only know the truth but also understand the error.  Scriptural precedent supports my conclusion.  Paul’s example in Athens (Acts 17:16-34) contradicts the thinking of those who misuse CMA.  Undeniably Paul knew scriptural truth, yet he rigorously examined the non-Christian thought of his day.  He invested time in examining the philosophy of the Athenians – including knowing Epicurean and Stoic writings.  Paul understood that correcting the Athenian false belief required understanding that belief.

The myth of CMA is that it is relevant to Christians who seek to study and understand non-Christian thought.  If Christians wish to fulfill the biblical mandate to correct error (2 Tim. 2:24-26), they will take the time to understand non-Christian writings and ideas.  Such an endeavor is a worthwhile pursuit for God’s people.  As Christians, God calls us not only to know the truth, but also correct error.  Effectiveness in this second task demands a serious investigation of non-Christian thought.  This is not only the job of Christian leaders, but a task no responsible Christian ought to neglect.^[2]

1. F. Bruce, The Defense of the Faith in the New Testament, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), 80.

2. This essay is an adaptation of my article bearing the same title published in the Christian Research Journal, vol. 20, no. 4 (April-June, 1998):54.