Religion of Love

Basics » 31 Questions » Part 1: World and Man » Question 02  (Previous | Next)

Question 2

[1473] Question 2: "Does the 'other reality' make itself felt in some way in our reality? What options has man to learn about it: that it exists at all and how it could be set up? What relevance do the revelations, scriptures and cultic traditions have? Are there miracles, to wit events in that the 'other reality' signifies itself by repealing the laws and conditions of our reality?"

[1474] Answer: The closer our L-relationship is, the more we learn about L. The more developed we become and are, the more purposefully we will find out the most important things - in the general as well as in the individual sense - and involve in our judging and acting. L is, as the highest being, also person who shows zerself accessible to us and with which we can and may talk about everything. [1475] If we sufficiently refine ourselves, we get from zer the best furthering that, however, demands us completely. Ze will only behave with respect to us as we and our structures allow this. Ze has preafforded and now it is our business to return. In this way, interplay of giving and taking emerges, which is from zis side just in all respects. [1476] Ze determines, however, which unit of the divine order or of the world assumes zis role. Thus, for example, this may be indeed a divine instance, which is for us indistinguishable from L, or a smaller unit, depending on the level of development. With our development the L-relationship is intensifying. A complete separation of L is impossible, since there are always transitive references. Thus, each human being that is not cared for by L zerself has at least one guardian angel, to whom ze can turn. [1477] Spirit guides first become active with a certain level of development of the led person and can be contacted at a higher level of development by the led person. Angels and spirit guides are our main interseders before L. There are enough beings in the worlds that take on a mediating role between L and the creatures. In addition to these contact options, one may also fathom oneself and come to results through suitable own considerations. [1478] Communication with others is also mostly open, where their superiority clearly furthers the efficiency and effectiveness. The revelation and the word of L are to take as very important and reliable sources. The word holy is used in the religion of love for no scripture of our world, since the Holy becomes first understandable in the infinity. [1479] Cultic traditions play in the religion of love, if at all, a negligible role, since everything mediate must prove to be worthy before L, the highest being, and usually cannot do so. Miracles occur often when it pleases L and zis subordinate beings. L is clearly above zis laws and conditions. Ze is almighty and that means that ze can bring about everything feasible. [1480] Ultimately, ze must, however, vindicate zerself for everything and this presupposes strong reasons. One can only wonder what all is possible for L and what ze does for one when it pleases zer. To name are here particularly comprehensive authorities to exert power such as the enforcement of certain heads of state and government as well as various policy goals and measures and the occurrence of certain events and outcomes (e.g., historical, meteorological, artistic, inventive, concerning health etc.). [1481] In essence it applies the sentence: "All things turn out the way one expects (or better)." Prerequisite is, however, sufficient discreetness, so that here details cannot be dwelled on. On the evidence of the widespread scientific scepticism compared to miracles, these are simply enjoyed and not blared out. Since one mostly cannot bring about them oneself, one should notably keep in with L, so that they also occur. [1482] Miracles are to be the exception, so that the divine order remains essentially not violated. They underline, however, unmistakably one's own authority and enhance the self-confidence. One thanks miracles through service for L. As extension the question is to be answered, how the "other reality" can be proved. There are no strict proofs (of L), since ultimately everything is questionable. [1483] The experience of L may be sufficient for the individual, scientifically it fails, since intersubjectivity is required. A finite world like ours cannot prove an echt infinite being, because it cannot comprehend the latter. So, at best, a finite part of L can be proved. The to be proven must be logically possible. This is the case for L. L is unconditional, since ze is, by definition, almighty. So there is no reason for L. [1484] So ze cannot be proved. On the other hand, our world bears witness - for example, in the fine tuning of the constants - of the presence of an intelligence exceeding our one. It belongs at least to one higher being than we are. The highest of these beings is L, since this proof scheme works for all other characteristics of L analogously. While the atheist can neither specify reason, cause nor sense, purpose or goal for our world, the theist has L. [1485] The concept of L and the subsequent worlds is paramountly useful and just, the atheism is implausible and unreliable, since everything happens just so against experience. The atheistic world is much poorer, harder and more unjust than the theistic one, in which eternal life, highest justice and fulfilment exist. The atheistic world produced as highest being merely the entirety of the mammals, which are, however, unable to understand their world completely. [1486] Thus, it was spawned by something that does not understand itself. This is almost absurd. Our world comes again and again up with new features, for example through new substances or symmetry breakings. Since nothing can emerge from nothing, the theist defers to the infinite potential of L and zis worlds, from which everything originates deliberately. For the atheist the whole thing just happens somehow, without much sense or reason. [1487] But for this it happens too purposefully and successfully. Here principles to postulate that optimise themselves, seems deeply questionable: what understandable reason it should give for that? They make themselves better without having achieved a certain degree of optimality. Altogether is to state that the atheism throws rather a smokescreen over it than to explain it. However, the theism is a very conclusive approach, which shuns no comparison.

© 2009 by Boris Haase

Valid XHTML 1.0 • Disclaimer • imprint • • pdf-version • questionnaire • bibliography • subjects • definitions • php-code • sitemap • rss-feed • top