Religion of Love

Basics » 31 Questions » Part 1: World and Man » Question 06  (Previous | Next)

Question 6

[1510] Question 6: "Can the 'other reality' be described with the categories and terms of our reality? Does the term 'God', for example, really mean a being in the sense of our understanding of 'person'? Or is it only a cipher for something that eludes any description? Which religious statements are to understand literally, and which are to understand only metaphorically, allegorically, symbolically or mythically?"

[1511] Answer: L can be well described with our categories and terms, since our world was created according to zis ideas and expands according to them. All essential possibilities of description that allow us to understand zer appropriately are available to us, if we restrict ourselves to understand what is relevant to us. [1512] Because of the finiteness of our world, we cannot understand the infinite in all its depth, but only make finite statements about it. Much more important than accumulating broad knowledge is the solution of the main problems of this world. This can be solved on a relatively simple level of complexity, even if their complexity is continuously increasing. The models also become indeed more complex, but the underlying ideas are in each case relatively simple, if one analyses them. [1513] L is person, if one understands by person a living entity that has a certain complexity, or zis conspecifics. Criterion may be, for example, whether the species is able to develop an adequate notion of L. The language of the word of L and the religion of love is poor in metaphors, allegories, symbols and myths, their statements, however, may not simply be understood literally. [1514] The question is extended by the posing of the question how the language of religion is and why it is so. It is imperative to understand the ideas contained properly, to which the form is subordinate. The language is goal-oriented and compact. It is unpretentious and factual, academic issues and ways of expression are spared. It mirrors the development status of the author. Brief explanations are given; a comment is later to meet further requirements. [1515] It is to be a gain for everybody to read the word of L. Therefore, everything is out of the question that is opposed to it. It is clearly broken with important traditions and "results" of science, if this is imperative. Therefore, it is carefully to deal with a previous knowledge that cannot be maintained before L. I tried to avoid unnecessary repetitions. Completely, I have not succeeded. Repetitions give a hint what can apply as secured and important.

© 2009 by Boris Haase

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