Don't look at the 5 senses

[doojable]

John - yes that is how it was taught. The teaching morphed and became a bludgeon used to control people. I remember people trying it with me. By that time though, I had one foot out the door, so I didn't care what they thought.

Basically, if you decided to do anything, (even if you had prayed about it and were sure that you were doing what God wanted,) and some leader wanted you to do something else, you were "going by your five senses."

The phrase was used to manipulate people by guilt.

[Ham]

Don't look at the 5 senses...WHEN????

Many times in scripture God has people do things that go against conventional wisdom. Examples:

1) the elder would serve the younger when Jacob and Esau were born

2) Jacob guided his hands wittingly when blessing Joseph's 2 sons Ephraim and Manassah so that the right hand was on the head of the younger

3) Samuel thought Jesse's eldest son was the next king of Israel, but God refused him

Don't look at the 5 senses. So, I'm not supposed to look at traffic signals? No. If God's word is clear, either by scripture or by revelation, THEN don't go by the 5 senses.

Conventional wisdom is part of the 5 senses.

which proves to me:

unless I hear a voice from heaven, or an "exception" granted by angels or something, to ME, personally.. that PROVES to be more than an illusion, or a garden variety hallucination,

conventional wisdom applies.

[Ham]

If one believes the account..

wasn't that what the devil tried on Jesus?

"ah, you're the son of God.. conventional wisdom does not apply.. just jump off, you'll be A OK.. ANGELS will take GOOD CARE of you.."

[Mike]

John - yes that is how it was taught. The teaching morphed and became a bludgeon used to control people.

Don't look at the 5 senses...WHEN????

If God's word is clear, either by scripture or by revelation, THEN don't go by the 5 senses.

Bingo! Back to the original teaching.

[Ham]

that's fine and all.. but for some people, I'd suggest they double check to see if it really was "revelation", or if they got their meds mixed up in the morning..

Personally, I've experienced a few "funny" things.. but I wouldn't interpret them as some kinda "message" to go build a church, or a cult or something..

It just might be a slight case of indigestion... hardly a reason to think you have the "revelation" to put all of your estate on number 44 on a wheel in Vegas..

[Ham]

I really really think..

99 percent of "revelation" is not much more than the product of an over active imagination..

loy saw "homos" coming in hordes out of the woods..

he seemed to have "revelation" about everything..

through his mighty mogness, he predicted the arrival of the last pope on U.S. soil by way of aircraft carrier..

yep. he was "trained" by the "best"..

It just might be a slight case of indigestion... hardly a reason to think you have the "revelation" to put all of your estate on number 44 on a wheel in Vegas..

In case you think I'm "demeaning" the proper usage of "revelation"..

a person would be far better off doing this, than gambling their whole life, REAL fortune or relationships on a whim, or "still small voice"..

loy renamed that one.. "genuine(?) spiritual(?) suspicion.."

he coulda saved ink, omitted the first two words..

[Mike]

I really really think..

99 percent of "revelation" is not much more than the product of an over active imagination..

But Ham, look at the other part of what johniam said "If God's word is clear, either by scripture or by revelation, THEN don't go by the 5 senses."

If we would get practiced at going by what is written, then we can slap down our over active imaginations when necessary, and hear that still small voice. Too many of us went for direct revelation and overlooked the writings that would have otherwise given us guidance.

[Ham]

But Ham, look at the other part of what johniam said "If God's word is clear, either by scripture or by revelation, THEN don't go by the 5 senses."

some of it is pretty "clear".. depending upon who's doing the reading, and the particualar section in which their mind APPEARS to be "actively engaged"..

"thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.."

now.. you may jump through hoops, try to modify that statement with vicster's "tools"..

but to date, I haven't seen a single verse after this, which DIRECTLY nulifies it.

You might consider the example trivial, but to many others, it is not..

I know at least one person, who justified almost virtual robbery and extortion, having read where "it's impossible for a rich man to enter the kingdom.."

He was doing those who held more resources than him a "favor"..

OH.. this was a "way" believer..

Trivial? apparently not to him. The verse was clear, very very clear..

[waysider]

But Ham, look at the other part of what johniam said "If God's word is clear, either by scripture or by revelation, THEN don't go by the 5 senses."

If we would get practiced at going by what is written, then we can slap down our over active imaginations when necessary, and hear that still small voice. Too many of us went for direct revelation and overlooked the writings that would have otherwise given us guidance.

Mike

Perhaps you could elaborate and explain how that applies to "The LEAD Accident".

Did they base their decision on scripture or did they base it on revelation?

Yeah, yeah, I know scripture is revelation too.

So what's the answer?

And yes, Mike, I'm well aware that the actual wording used was "Do not be deceived by your five senses" and not,

" Don't go by your five senses".

If anything, the original wording actually intensifies the admonition because it adds the element of consequence.

(ie: Doing so could result in deception.)

Even so, the meaning is still quite clear whether you write it in English, French or Russian though the actual wording of a translation will often change the actual wording and syntax.

You can dicker 'til the cows come home about i's being dotted and t's being crossed but the essence of the meaning will remain unchanged.

When you say, "the writings that would have given us guidance", can you present a specific example?

Please don't simply say "the PFAL book".

I would like a specific reference to illustrate your assertion.

[doojable]

Bingo! Back to the original teaching.

DUH!

The complaint is NOT what didn't ever even have to be the original teaching. "The original teaching" was common sense (or common knowlege if you want to use johniam's phrase.) The complaint is in the manipultation by guilt.

You tell a Christian they're not walking spiritually... a cultie taught to "not ask how high" when a MOG makes a "suggestion that is tantamount to an order"...

Recipe for manipulation.