The Wolf.........

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dean1818

Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2010
Messages
913
Location
Texas!
I saw this posted on facebook

The Wolf, the Shepherd, the Sheepdog, and the Sheep

The wolf wants to kill and eat the sheep. That’s what a wolf does.

The wolf HATES the shepherd and the sheepdogs, because they each keep
the wolf away and protect the flock of sheep.

The shepherd has a very large herd of sheep. Because the herd is so large, and the number of wolves, seem to keep growing, sheepdogs are also necessary to protect the herd.

The wolf, by nature, will approach the edge of the herd, and whisper to the sheep that will listen, that a sheepdog just isn’t necessary.

The wolf will use great sounding arguments of where a sheepdog actually bit a sheep. They will repeat the same story, and add exaggerations to this story to make the sheep believe.

They will convince the sheep that will listen, that there are only a few wolves, and that they are misunderstood, and are really no threat to the herd.

Some of the sheep may begin to tell other sheep that they don’t need a sheepdog, using the same argument as the wolf.

Because of these few sheep, the sheep herd may approach the sheepdog and tell him that they only way that he can stay if for him to remove his front teeth. The sheepdog’s front teeth are sharp, and scary looking, and there obviously isn’t a true need for them.

Because of these few sheep, the rest of the sheep may get together, and drive off the sheepdog, or force him to remove his sharp front teeth to stay.

After the sheepdog goes away, the wolf will again come back to the edge of the herd, and tell the sheep that will listen, that there is not really a need for the shepherd.

The wolf will use great sounding arguments of where a shepherd mistreated a sheep. They will tell the sheep that will listen, that the shepherd only likes sheep of certain color wool. They will repeat the same story, and add exaggerations to this story to make the sheep believe.

The wolf will tell the sheep that the shepherd doesnt need the staff and spear, as these are scary looking. The wolf will tell the sheep that the shepherd can do his job, but he doesn’t need to come around so often, as there really isn’t a threat.

Some of the sheep may begin to tell other sheep that they don’t need a shepherd, using the same argument as the wolf

Because of a few sheep, the sheep herd may get together, and drive off the shepherd.

At the end, the only thing left is a growing pack of hungry wolves, and the herd of sheep.

Can you guess what is on the menu?

The police and the legally armed citizen are the good guys, 99.9% of the time.

(Can you guess who they are in the story?)

Other than that…….. the Wolf, and those influenced by the Wolf, may not be your friend………
 
Ultimately, any analogy of sheep, shepherd and wolfs all go back to the Bible. Jesus talks a lot about how He is the Good Shepherd and how His flock knows His voice and follows Him. The wolves pray on the sheep, and can even attack from within the herd (wolves dressed in sheep's clothing).

When the Bible compares people to sheep, it is spot on, absolutely true. Sheep are dumb, fragile, needy and tend to get themselves into trouble. They will absolutely be devoured or die in the wild without a shepherd. Remember, David was a shepherd boy before he slew Goliath and ultimately became the King of Israel.

Within the church I attend, men are tasked to be the sheepdogs, not shepherds. Christ, is The Shepherd. We are simply more like sheepdogs, the women and the children are not asked to be sheepdogs. This doesn't mean we are macho men who walk around with a sense of entitlement, it simply means we are more aware of wolves, where the wolves are and who they are.
 
Thanks for the link to the Colonel's piece. His ideas were a bit rambling and less coherent than the edited and repackaged fable that the OP shares. I think not so much "bastardized" as re-presented in a fable form might be a better characterization. Some kind of attribution to the original would be nice, if the Colonel's version is the original version of the fable.

Fables attempt to teach life lessons in that they tell a story more simply and try to reveal moral truths through roles played by animals. Animals provide an easy metaphor for people because they can be understood as simplified and 2-dimensional characters with known, stereotyped behaviors and attributes.

I've got a clue I'd like to share with THR members... as long as we keep referring to liberals as "sheep", we are never going to get anywhere.
 
Yes they can and many believe that just because they have a gun, they aren't sheep.

Anybody that understanding shepherding would not want to be a sheepdog.
 
I think any theory that attempts to lump all people into a handful of buckets is inherently flawed, and not because of some 'grey area' philosophic nonsense; humans are simply more complicated than that.

The metaphor is also deeply flawed, because:
-Both the shepherd and sheep dogs are fully capable of controlling the herd (the sheep are not in reality 'capable' of disobeying to the extent described)
-Sheep are domesticated, shepherds are not, and sheepdogs less so
-Wolves don't ingratiate themselves to their prey
-Both the shepherd and sheepdog do a whole lot more than protect the sheep

A certain scene in Team America explains the world just as thoroughly...

Animal Farm is a much better allegory involving animals, if such is to your liking. This sheep/shepherd stuff always comes off as the same flavor of superior-breed tripe that tyrants use to justify imposing their beliefs on others. What I see is more along the lines of an upstart sheep purporting to be a shepherd, so he can drive off the sheepdog to cement his rule. All the while being led by the other sheep as utterly as he was by the shepherd's simple directives, thinking his actions are his own. Classic 'ship with a captain but without a rudder' scenario, if you don't mind the mixed metaphor.

TCB
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top