11,153
edits
Red Herring Arguments: Difference between revisions
→VoGR's red herring logic
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
Message believers have to reconcile what they believe (that William Branham was a prophet) with historic facts (that William Branham's prophecies did not all come to pass). The easiest way to do this is to trivialize the importance of facts until the person feels comfortable ignoring them. This is required because of a psychological condition which is common in people involved in cults that is referred to as [[Cognitive Dissonance]]. | Message believers have to reconcile what they believe (that William Branham was a prophet) with historic facts (that William Branham's prophecies did not all come to pass). The easiest way to do this is to trivialize the importance of facts until the person feels comfortable ignoring them. This is required because of a psychological condition which is common in people involved in cults that is referred to as [[Cognitive Dissonance]]. | ||
There is no such fish as a "red herring"; it refers to a particularly strong kipper, a fish (typically a herring) that has been strongly cured in brine and/or heavily smoked. This process makes the fish particularly pungent smelling and, with strong enough brine, turns its flesh reddish. The term "red herring" was thought to have originated from the technique of training young fox hounds. When the dog was being trained to follow the faint odour of a fox, the trainer would drag a red herring (whose strong scent would confuse the animal) acreoss the animal's trail to confuse the dog. | |||
The dog eventually learned to follow the scent of the fox rather than the stronger scent of the red herring. | |||
Voice of God Recordings explanation of why William Branham's failed prophecies are not important relies totally on red herring arguments. | In the area of logic or arguments, a '''red herring''' is an issue or fact that is introduced to deliberately mislead or distract a person from the actual concern that is being raised. A red herring is a distracting argument that leads people towards a false conclusion. A red herring might be intentionally used (particularly where there are no real arguments against the issue), or it could be inadvertently used during an argument as a result of poor logic. | ||
Voice of God Recordings explanation of why William Branham's failed prophecies are not important relies totally on the use of red herring arguments. | |||
==VoGR's basic argument== | ==VoGR's basic argument== | ||
| Line 79: | Line 82: | ||
Here are two reasonable explanations (one Jewish, and the other Christian) which are provided as to why no real issue problem exists between Genesis 15:13 (“400 years”) and Exodus 12:40 (“430 years”). | Here are two reasonable explanations (one Jewish, and the other Christian) which are provided as to why no real issue problem exists between Genesis 15:13 (“400 years”) and Exodus 12:40 (“430 years”). | ||
This red herring was also used by [[A response to Pastor Wisper Gwena|Pastor Wisper Gwena in his recent defense of William Branham]]. | |||
===Differences in the Gospel Accounts=== | ===Differences in the Gospel Accounts=== | ||