Thoughts about our need for an explanation.

[weareunity]

Hello realizefun, -great username.

If the word "god" is replaced by the word "love", --or if god is love, could the notion of love longing to share of "itself" be a facet to what you are thinking/suggesting re the universe wanting to discover?

petex

[weareunity]

Hello lemex

My apologies for not responding to your post 13 sooner. --Been plodding.

Re "we are learning to love"--which you say/think-- wondering if the appearance of the apparent divide which the new born begins to experience as the sensory faculties which are designed to function across this "divide" begin to be used in a reasoned way, is a divide which the self needs help to gain confidence in bridging by means other than the sensory faculties?--and also perhaps other than for reasons of giving notice and attention to necessity--hunger, pain, need of various variety.

So that becoming capable of bridging this apparent--yet seeming to be very real--divide for reasons of emotional giving-actively expressing love--may well depend upon some form of nurturing example being first demonstrated, connected with, lovingly given,wisely given, empathically given freely. --(the "correct" words do not easily come to mind which accurately reflect the required nurture which is quite different to "spoiling".)

If, for some reason, this connection doesn't happen, then perhaps our ability to express love, to be loving, is hampered. The effects of this may extend way beyond childhood, as we are aware.

Is this "connecting, nurture, being shown" something along the lines of " we are learning to love" of which you speak/write?

petex

[CosmicWonder]

Originally Posted by weareunity

Hello realizefun, -great username.

If the word "god" is replaced by the word "love", --or if god is love, could the notion of love longing to share of "itself" be a facet to what you are thinking/suggesting re the universe wanting to discover?

petex

Thank you. I doubt what my username means though. Creating fun? Realizing fun? Maybe it means more to me. Or to my path.

To the point. I don’t think God equals love in the way I described. But sure, one of the ways to look at God is to see love rising up and say “that’s God”. But maybe God just has a very close love for us... so close that we mistakenly say “God is love” and see it as the only form of “God”. I think it also depends on which layer of God you look at. If God is all, then God is even hatred and hatred is love.

[weareunity]

Hello.

Of course we don't have to--because the choice is ours, but we could seek guidance from the god of free will when considering your last sentence realizefun.--and even then we are not obliged to accept or follow that guidance? A considerable conundrum!

petex

Originally Posted by weareunity

Hello Greenslade.

If the mystery of loving is considered as being spiritual, then yes, I do find evidence of that mystery on these pages. The mystery remains however Imo, and I am personally content with that-- though what does become apparent is the effect wherever it is evident, and also the effect when it is absent---also Imo.

petex

Scientists have found that we are predisposed towards Spirituality by way of our genetics, so I guess from a very cold perspective there's no real mystery any more. Like finding out that your parents left you the gifts, not Santa. But it's the thought that Spirituality is within our human nature, already coded into our building blocks that can take you a step outside yourself into a higher level of wonder. It's also the realisation that it's not just about Spirituality but also the human side that's often left behind in the rush to climb the mountain.


If we looked inside ourselves we'd find that the effect is never absent as much as our genes are never absent, and that everybody has the very tangible potential too. It's all about focus, not what is or what is supposed to be.

[FairyCrystal]

Originally Posted by weareunity

Hello all.

Wondering about-- how powerful is our need for an explanation when contemplating the unknown?

And so on--

petex

Depends on what it is about. I think one should have a healthy balance in being able to trust and know intuitively and needing an explanation and proof.
If someone is about proof and explanation only I feel this is an indication of a disconnect with the heart and intuition. In other words: not healthy.

Someone mentioned science is built on this. That's exactly why I don't like science. They disregard everything they can't proof yet. Which means they make themselves god. They're the gauge for life. But they lag behind meaning they're not a very good gauge.
It often takes science 10-20 years to come up with their proof which is exactly the same as our grandmothers or ancestors already knew and passed on for generations. The same with what wiser, more intuitive people say. Think old traditions and old people's wisdom (India, China, Native Americans, Pagans, etc. etc.) And also 'average' people's intuition and inner knowing like you and me.
So although I can see there's a need for science for some things, I don't like science. Too black and white for me.

I guess I can say that in many matters I don't need explanation. I feel and listen to my intuition, even for knowing when I do need explanation.

[EdmundJohnstone]

Well, you are able to write messages on this forum due to this



which was invented by scientists, and not by wise and spiritual people blabbing around so I wouldn't totally refute science. At least science has proof, not just something vague as speculations, imagination and wishful thinking. Unfortunately science and implicitly materialism have the upper hand at the moment as they can deliver logical, rational proof, whereas wishful thinking and speculations can't

Originally Posted by FairyCrystal

Depends on what it is about. I think one should have a healthy balance in being able to trust and know intuitively and needing an explanation and proof.
If someone is about proof and explanation only I feel this is an indication of a disconnect with the heart and intuition. In other words: not healthy.

Someone mentioned science is built on this. That's exactly why I don't like science. They disregard everything they can't proof yet. Which means they make themselves god. They're the gauge for life. But they lag behind meaning they're not a very good gauge.
It often takes science 10-20 years to come up with their proof which is exactly the same as our grandmothers or ancestors already knew and passed on for generations. The same with what wiser, more intuitive people say. Think old traditions and old people's wisdom (India, China, Native Americans, Pagans, etc. etc.) And also 'average' people's intuition and inner knowing like you and me.
So although I can see there's a need for science for some things, I don't like science. Too black and white for me.

I guess I can say that in many matters I don't need explanation. I feel and listen to my intuition, even for knowing when I do need explanation.

[lemex]

Originally Posted by weareunity

Re "we are learning to love"--which you say/think--

Found the wording interesting. Let me give a real life example. What if a person speaks from direct experience about an experience, young or old and a person says to another this is not love for instance. An abusive relation is an example. The relation one has with another is a relation they also have with themselves. Notice it does not stop even though it is pointed directly to. All individuals are nurtured by love but definitely not (positive) love even if that were an example.

When something is not, it must change and more important imo if it is said. There is a greater responsibility. Usually it is rejected. It is the rejection I talk about in all relationships. The idea of love by example, nurtured and learned needs to honestly be viewed in how it is expressed if we are told it is not and there are cases of that. One can even see in the world many examples of what I consider flawed love and it's not realized or accepted though everyone is nurtured. I'm not speaking of the new born but adults though is true Jesus said come to me as a child. We become definitely different.

If love that is taught is flawed then love will be flawed. There are cases of people hurting others where imo it should 1) not happen and 2) be stopped. The thing I have noticed, even if it should not be, it is not stopped. Probably not a good explanation but I do think we could be and do so much better from the more general to most specific. Appreciate any input.

[Altair]

Originally Posted by FairyCrystal

Depends on what it is about. I think one should have a healthy balance in being able to trust and know intuitively and needing an explanation and proof.
If someone is about proof and explanation only I feel this is an indication of a disconnect with the heart and intuition. In other words: not healthy.
Someone mentioned science is built on this. That's exactly why I don't like science. They disregard everything they can't proof yet. Which means they make themselves god.

Hey FairyCrystal,

Understanding our universe and nature, and improving our lives doesn't make us gods.

Originally Posted by FairyCrystal

It often takes science 10-20 years to come up with their proof which is exactly the same as our grandmothers or ancestors already knew and passed on for generations.

Without science, our understanding of the universe, nature, and plant and animal life is - and I say this with respect to our ancestors - a joke when looked at it now, in hindsight.

Scientists have learned more about our universe in a few centuries than our grandmothers and ancestors in millennia. Scientists have made antibiotics and vaccines to rid us of many deadly diseases. The chances of dying from those diseases throughout much of human history were FAR greater. I dread to think what would happen these days with plague or ebola outbreaks without modern science and medicine. Or in the case of trying to understand the universe or life on earth we'd advised to not look for answers out there because the religious scriptures got it all 'covered', or we'd be told to make discoveries fit within a religious narrative...

Nah thanks. We should really be dropping on our knees and be thankful for the era we live in, and our opportunities to learn and understand. We are truly on a privileged page in human history.

[weareunity]

Hello lemex.

I believe I see in your post the journeying of a fellow ponderer doing as we do,--doing our best to put into words the substance of our ponderings. Trying to explain in written word thoughts which seem to have come without bidding into our minds and yet are difficult to then pass on as communication. Maybe I am wrong in seeing this--doubt is itself a considerable contemplation.

Is "we are learning to love" (from, and in the context of your post 13), become a necessity for survival? Perhaps better expressed as---Realising the essential need for loving behaviour as now being the only way forward if we are to survive ?-- (An acceptance of this form of expression seems to accommodate "free will", whereas any notion that "you must love or else" does not do so ?)

"Realising" being not simply a mental appreciation, but a mental appreciation made reality.

As you can tell--I am struggling also.

Good wishes.

petex