I have had a problem throughout my life. This problems is "love" or rather, my not understanding what love is. Thus, I am writing this blog post to help others see what my conclusions are, and the blueprints to its discovery. The Heart has been covered in another post, so I will try to steer away from that.
Now, LDS.ORG topics defines love as, "Love is a feeling of deep devotion, concern, and affection. The greatest example of God's love for His children is found in the infinite Atonement of Jesus Christ. Love for God and fellow men is a characteristic of disciples of Jesus Christ."
"But charity is the pure love of Christ, and it endureth forever; and whoso is found possessed of it at the last day, it shall be well with him." (Moroni 7:47)
"And Charity suffereth long, and is kind, and envieth not, and is not puffed up, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil, and rejoiceth not in iniquity but rejoiceth in the truth, beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things." (Moroni 7:45)
God's love for us is then closely related to our love for Him, and we show that love by Christ's words, "If ye love me, keep my commandments." (John 14:15).
Lastly, and this is the kind of love I wanted to focus on, is romantic love. The best single definition I have found for specifically this type of love is a definition from ArtTrade.TV.
I think of Hinckley's reference to the rainbow is a parable for life. Too often we hope to eventually reach love, that it is the prize at the end of the journey. However, this is not so, we can have love at the beginning of the journey, and all along the rainbow itself. We are meant to have love.
Hinckley continues, "I am one who believes that love, like faith, is a gift of God. I agree with the expression, "Love cannot be forced, love cannot be coaxed and teased." (Pearl Buck, in The Treasure Chest, ed. Charles L. Wallis, New York: Harper and Row, 1965, p. 165.) "Ignorant people are always saying, 'I wonder what he sees in her [or him]; not realizing that what he [or she] sees in her [or him] (and what no one else can see) is the secret essence of love." (Sydney J. Harris, Deseret News.)
The First Presidency message in the October 1996 Liahona adds, "Love is the catalyst that causes change. Love is the balm that brings healing to the soul. But love doesn't grow like weeds or fall like rain. Love has its price. "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life? (John 3:16). That Son, even the Lord Jesus Christ, gave His life that we might have eternal life, so great was His love for His Father and for us." (The Doorway of Love)
There are so many people that believe that faith is just something one has. Yet it is a gift from God. Some people have received this gift seemingly from the womb, others have to work and pray for it. Wonderfully, this gift is meant for each and every one of us! Even more magnificent still, the gift of love is the same way. There are those who seem to know love, have love, and share love from their early infantry, alas, I am not one of those. I have been working so hard to gain love in my life. My prayers as of recently have magnified this intent. However, it has been a rough uphill struggle.
From that first night that I poured out my whole soul to God to teach me about love, I have been met with literal spiritual attacks by malevolent spirits. They haunt my dreams trying to obscure and corrupt my thoughts and hopes for love. Through my persistence and strength given to me from God, I feel like I have come to at least identify what love is in my life,
In my daily research I have found this quote from President David O. McKay who in turn quoted George Q. Morris. What is true love?
"Well, you may ask, 'how may I know when I am in love?'
"... George Q. Morris [who later became a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, gave this reply]: 'My mother once said that if you meet a girl in whose presence you feel a desire to achieve, who inspires you to do your best, and to make the most of yourself, such a young woman is worthy of your love and is awakening love in your heart.'
"I submit that... as a true guide. In the presence of the girl you truly love you do not feel to grovel; in her presence you do not attempt to take advantage of her; in her presence you feel that you would like to be everything that a Master Man should become, for she will inspire you to that ideal. And I ask you young women to cherish that same guide"
That is my current measurement for finding love. If I meet a girl in whose presence or even the idea of being with her fills me with such a desire to better myself, to better myself for her, then I know that I am feeling love.
Currently, I feel that way for a particular girl, however, as far as I know this is one sided. Thus, another term that needs to be brought up is a "crush". From my experience, a "crush" is the first seeds of love that are one sided. Indeed, because these are the first seeds, they can easily be corrupted from love, wanting to become better for that person, to lust or jealousy, even outright objectification. These corrupted seeds tend to quickly die, or if nourished, bring forth a very bitter and blighted tree. A tree whose fruit is void of love.
However, my love for this girl is yet pure and untainted despite being in this crush stage. Ironically, I hold on to this love extremely tightly, for it is the result of all my prayers on the subject, yet I realize that if I hold onto it too tightly, and that love is not shared in return, then my heart will be broken asunder, and could corrupt even further, my hopes of happiness and love.
"There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love." (1 John 4:18)
I remember hearing Seven Crowder from Louder with Crowder, somewhat offhandedly, say concerning this verse in correlation to physical violence, something along the lines of: Was Christ afraid? I think He was when He was pleading to God to not have to be crucified, not have to suffer for our sins and die. He was afraid, as I would be if someone was trying to kill me or my family. "Fear" is not the same as being "afraid".
Now I say, love casts out fear by enabling an individual to move past fear. Like how "courage" is not the absence of fear, but knowing what has to be done and then doing it. Love transforms fear into courage.
Thus why I straining to keep this love pure and clean, for if I better myself, become the man that she deserves and who is worthy of her love, then maybe, just maybe, she would be able to have love for me in return. If not, then I will be that much more worthy and able to love at my next opportunity to find it.
"I finally understood what true love meant. Love meant that you care for another person's happiness more than your own, no matter how painful the choices you face might be."
-Dear John
I would not choose my own love for her over her happiness, because that is the nature of love.
This leads me to Elder Marvin J. Ashton's definition of love, or rather, true love.
"True love is a process. True love requires personal action. Love must be continuing to be real. Love takes time. Too often expediency, infatuation, stimulation, persuasion, or lust are mistaken for love. How hollow, how empty if our love is not deeper than the arousal of momentary feeling or the expression in words of what is no more lasting than the time it takes to speak them...."
I agree that "True love is a process." I also know how vainly we can use the word "love". A friend of mine said that love as a word is a verbal contract that we will care about that person. That we will be compassionate, charitable, kind, and be there for them. Another man put it this way. "Love is a commitment to protecting another person's heart with the same passion you use to guard your own." -@RobHillSr
Alas, as I have brought up, there is more than this verbal contract. There is more than just chemicals like testosterone (increases lust and aggression), phenylethylamine (triggers adrenaline and dopamine production), adrenaline (the "zing" like feeling), dopamine (increases energy), serotonin (nostalgia or continued thinking of the individual), oxytocin (cuddle hormone released during orgasm) and vasopressin (anti-diuretic released after sex). There is more than emotions. I believe that as love increases it become a bonding of spirits.
Elder John A. Widtsoe
"Above physical charm, live is begotten by qualities, often subtle, of mind and spirit. The beautiful face may hide an empty mind; the sweet voice may utter coarse words; the lovely form may be ill-mannered; the woman of radiant beauty and the man of kingly form may be intolerable bores on nearer acquaintanceship; or, the person who looks attractive may really have no faults, may excel us in knowledge and courtesy, yet he is not of our kind, his ways are not ours. Under either condition, love wilts in its first stage. 'Falling in love' is always from within, rather than from without. That is, physical attractiveness must be reinforced with mental and spiritual harmony if true love is to be born and have long life--from the Latter-day Saint point of view, to last throughout the eternities? (Evidences and Reconciliations, 297, 299, 302)."
"Soul Mates" as most people define, do not exist. There is not only one chance for any of us to be happy or to find romantic love. However, once we have chosen someone to love, they have chosen to love us in return, then those two, "And they twain shall be one flesh:..." (Mark 10:8). Indeed, a united couple of husband an wife, legally and lawfully by God become Soul Mates. (President Dieter F. Uchtdorf: The Reflection in the Water)
Now we see the stages of love, from a crush, to a romance, to becoming soul mates. Now, once a couple becomes soul mates, is that the end of the progression of love? No, indeed, this is where it becomes the most crucial, the most important and vital to maintain that love. To solidify it ever deeper and ever stronger until it is unbreakable, then it still must be maintained. Like and impervious force-field, without continued power, the shield collapses.
"Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?..."
"nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Romans 8:35, 39)
"Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God."
"He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love." (1 John 4:7-8)
"Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;...
Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband." (Ephesians 5:25,33)
"Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shalt cleave unto her and none else." (Doctrine and Covenants 42:22)
"If one really loves another, one would rather die for that person than to injure him."
--Elder Spencer W. Kimball
I do not know who said this, but I will close with this quote. "Love is like water; we can fall in it, we can drown in it, and we can't live without it."
Love and happiness, indeed joy, is what I wish for all of you in your lives. Feel free to leave any comments.
Love,
Jacobugoth
Great post Jacob. I wanted to share some of my thoughts on the matter from an atheists’ perspective, just as something to chew on.
ReplyDeletePart of the process I’ve gone through the last few years is deconstructing the notions that I used to think were true. Basically, by looking at everything I’d been taught or just seemed to believe implicitly and letting go of necessarily believing them so I could put them to the test. Or just deconstruct them, and maybe later on I would rebuild a similar idea as I learned. I let go off my notions about love and so far it hasn’t reconstructed into anything very similar to what I believed before.
Love is one of those elusive terms that means a million things to a million different people and nobody really agreed with what it is. I’m not really sure what it means because it’s so hard to define.
One thing I’ve learned is that most believing Mormons and some other religious people believe in a concept of love that does not include acceptance. They believe that it’s possible to “love” someone but still have requirements for what makes them acceptable as a human being or not. This is the natural result, of course, of having arbitrary sets of requirements that implicitly(if not explicitly) dictate what makes a person acceptable or not. An example is like telling a child, “I love you, but once you get to be over 5 feet tall, then you’ll be acceptable.”
They idea is that the “love” is still there, but they need other people to match up to certain requirements to be fully accepted. Mormons handle this concept in an interesting way, saying that it’s because of the love that they want the other person to change. “I love you, but you need to change and be better,” is the message implied through the double standard of love + requirements for acceptability. Not all Mormons interpret it this way, some ironically believe in a more liberal Jesus, who accepts people. But the people who do see it that way think that God also sees us that way, as if he withholds his acceptance of us until we reach a certain point of “keeping the commandments.”
To me, love without acceptance is ridiculous, and somewhat cruel, though it’s often not meant to be.
Acceptance is something that has really helped me out in life, if I accept myself and everything about myself as I am, then I can be happier now, and not worry about working towards some point of escaping the negative feeling of being somehow unacceptable. That why I find that a lot of religious people, because they feel not good enough, because of the requirements placed upon them defining their acceptability, seek to fill this gap somehow; often by extreme ambition or devotion, or trying to gain the love and acceptance of others, or other methods; often leading to cycles between depression/failure feelings and working really hard at something.
I try to accept myself and all others, on top of that comes human empathy, which is like a moral compass to me, allowing me to choose to be decent to other people and not cause unnecessary pain.
To be honest, I’d rather be accepted completely, then be “loved” by someone, whatever that means. And if someone doesn’t accept me, that’s ok, because I believe I am acceptable, and I can find human connection and friends elsewhere.
.
Anyways, now about romantic love(this is gonna be a long comment….)
.
Since deconstructing my old ideas, I haven’t built a concept of romantic love that’s similar to before. I’ve personally actually struggled a lot with thinking that I would never end up with a woman that I really wanted to be with, that somehow all the women I liked were just destined to never be with me. It was like a curse, any time there was a girl and we both liked each other, something got in the way. And with several of the girls I very seriously liked I kept running into the same problem “there’s just no spark.” They had trouble articulating it, but it was the same thing over and over and over, and I’d be in the friend zone forever with them.
DeleteWhat is the “spark” that was missing then??? Well, what sets apart a friend from someone you want to date? What’s the difference? The difference is all the things you do with a lover that you wouldn’t with a friend: kissing, sex, romance, relationships, marriage, etc. In order for this to happen there has to be sexual attraction. A woman wouldn’t want to kiss a man who she has no sexual attraction towards, just like a straight man obviously wouldn’t want to kiss a guy friend.
I used to think that women would logically process our platonic friendship and evaluate my qualities, and then like me based on those. But I realized that it’s more about how she feels, there has to be that spark that “turns her on,” sexually and romantically. Without that it’s just a friendship. (I’m not saying that romance doesn’t include friendship, it does, but also more.)
Ok so based on that, it’s important to understand what is attractive to women and what “turns them off.” It’s not based on looks! As far as looks go, it’s more about whether a man has the appearance of a socially adept person, with an acceptable social status. So just basic grooming and dress that would make her comfortable being seen with him while her friends or family around. This adds tons of attraction versus sloppy dress and grooming. But still, it’s not about that.
The fact is, generally speaking, women like men. Just like men like women. Women like men, therefore, if you are a man, then women like you, because you are a man. Not all women like all men, and vice versa; but that’s the basics, women like you because women like men.
I never really internalized this idea until less than a year ago, before that my entire life was spent trying to GET women to like me! I really thought I had to convince them to like me.
If I think of things from a woman’s perspective, from her perspective imagine there’s two guys: guy1 is someone who’s really nice to you and friendly and wants to hang out with you more. Guy2 has expressed that he’s interested in you, and has asked you to spend time with him one Thursday. So, you hang out with guy1, he’s really nice and you have a good time talking. Then you hang out with guy2, and he’s obviously interested, he makes long eye contact which shows his romantic interest, which causes you to feel something funny inside. Guy1 always wants to hang out, he’s nice, but he seems to be too nice, he goes out of his way to be nice to you and seems to be afraid of saying anything that will make you not like him; he places you on a pedestal. Guy2 is less needy or available, but you hang out with him again and have fun, he’s not as nice as guy1, but not mean either, he touches you lightly and makes eye contact, at the end of the date he tries to kiss you, you turn him away because you’re not ready, but you’re way flattered because he likes you so much and want to see him again. Guy1 keeps hanging out, he seems to be afraid of touching you or else he might do something wrong or offend you, still really nice. Later he messages you and tells you he really likes being with you and wants to see you more. He keeps trying to hang out, but when you do hang out it’s nice, but he still seems so self-conscious and afraid to offend you or anything, so he just acts like a friend most of the time, which is
kind-of a mixed message, you’re not sure if he likes you romantically or not. You go out with guy2 again the next day, it’s nice and flattering that he’s so interested in you. He holds your hand and you have a fun time, even though you don’t really talk to deeply or connect that much, but when he looks at you intently there’s that spark, and you kiss his him back when he kisses you later. You tell guy1 a few days later that you like guy2, he gets upset and asks why you don’t like him. It’s not that you don’t like him, it’s just that “there’s no spark,” you just don’t feel that same inner attraction with guy1 as you do with guy2 and you can’t explain it! Even though guy1 is a great friend and you seem to even connect better with him then guy2. But guy2 makes you feel all jittery inside when you see him so you keep dating guy2, and guy1 is in the friendzone for who knows how long after.
DeleteThat was a long example, I just made it up, but I’m sure it matches so many people’s stories. The girl is going to go for the guy2 that makes her feel something inside, even if another guy1 is even more attractive or an even better match logically.
I know what it’s like to have one-sided love, it sucks. And I now finally understand the mindsets that caused that for me, and I understand a little bit how to get out of that.
I could write everything I know about dating, but it would take forever… let me know if you’re interested in hearing any more. A lot of stuff I’ve learned has helped me out.
Once more thing I wanted to say about this quote "If one really loves another, one would rather die for that person than to injure him." I have seen the philosophy go to the point where it is very harmful and destructive. That quote, taken seriously, would make someone walk around on eggshells afraid of accidentally hurting someone else. It can be used for emotional abuse and manipulation. For example, I love my mother, but there are certain times when I was living there where I would do something, not intending to do anything wrong or hurtful, and my mom would get really really hurt and offended by it, even though I had done nothing to attack her or anything. One big example is when I left the church, she was obviously devastated by it, even though for me I very much felt like it was a right decision, and I wasn’t trying to attack anyone by it. I knew it would hurt some people but I had to do it for me. It I had been trying to tiptoe around and not hurt my mother I would have not left the church and maybe pretended I still believed, but that would be weird for me and dishonest to myself. What I’m saying is that if someone is hurt by our actions, and we evaluate it and determine that the action is right for us anyways, and is not an intentional attack on someone else, then it’s still right. And then it’s their choice and their problem to get hurt by it, not ours. They could try to use their pain to convince you to do or not do something, but that’s emotional manipulation. I had to learn to turn empathy off sometimes though, so I could still make my own decisions and stand as my own man, and then allow other people to hurt if they choose to.
Reply to comment 1. I believe I understand what you are saying about acceptance and love. As I pointed out there are different kinds of love, and that love Christ has for us, that "liberal" love is charity and pure love with no requirements and abundant acceptance. Christ accepts the sinner no matter what they have done, and loves them, and even gave His life for them. Though, as you concluded this comment, you brought up romantic love. I believe there is a difference. First, which how there is that first seed of love, that crush. That love was inspired without limitations with full acceptance, whatever the trigger might be. However, if that individual does not nourish it, that seed of love can either become lust or just fade away. It is the individual's acceptance of that love and that individual that keeps that love going. So I would say that in some ways we choose who to love through accepting them or not. We can either accept them exactly as they are and love them. Or we could love some fictitious imaginary version of them that we picture in our minds that the real them will never reach. Thus, I agree, true love requires acceptance, of every fault and every blemish physical, spiritual, mental and any other possible way. There was a quote I found, but did not include, "Love is finding perfection in imperfection." -Aaron Timothy Hirou
DeleteReply to comment 2/3 ish. I agree with what you said about attraction of a boy and a girl. No one can make someone love another, love cannot be forced or persuaded. I have compared love to a seed, that first crush or spark feeling. But trying to force love is like trying to plant a seed without having one. Like planting a rock pretending or calling it a seed. If that seed is not there, nothing is going to grow no matter how much you water it. Thus, another point, and I think how I officially defined a crush as a one sided love. One person has that seed and love for another, but the recipient of that love does not have a seed of their own. Thus, it only becomes true love if both people have that spark or seed of love and they both continue to nourish that love growing it. If either party stops nourishing that love, then their love begins to dwindle. That does not mean they cannot begin nourishing it again, but an individual can reach a point at which that love has been killed off or is gone. Again, you brought up the excellent point about the kinds of love. Someone might love someone as a friend, brotherly or sisterly love, and feel no romantic love, or as you put it sexual attraction. Though, I should point out that sexual attraction is just a variable of romantic love, and that sexual attraction on its own quickly becomes lust. I do, however, absolutely agree that sexual attraction is a key variable or characteristic of romantic love, without it, it is not romantic love.
DeleteLastly, reply to comment 3's ending. From "my" perspective, especially with the example that you gave of leaving the church, we have been great friends for many, many years... Decades! We will likely be friend still, well, as long as we keep that brotherly love alive anyway. I do not feel like I was hurt, personally, when you left the church, I was saddened by it and shocked, but not hurt. I knew it was something that you had decided and I have wanted, and will continue to want, to support you in your decisions whether or not I agree with them. That being said, I thank you for pointing out that anything put to the extreme can, and usually is, harmful. That quote, "If one really loves another, one would rather die for that person than to injure him." can easily become extreme, as you said, to the point of walking on eggshells. Faith itself, as you have pointed out to me before, can be taken to the extreme of blind faith and can become quite horrific. Even air, or rather, oxygen, in high enough quantities kills people. Thus, it is important to keep the proper perspective and intent or spirit of the message, commandment, law, or whatever in mind. For this specific case or quote, one emotion or prompting that comes with love is a desire to protect, a desire of such deep devotion that if it was necessary one would die in their loved one's place. Also, because of that last key phrase, one would not hurt someone they loved if there was another way. Again, with your example with your mother, you love her, but there was no other way for you to be free to learn life's lessons for yourself without hurting her in that way. A prime example from the scriptures is in John chapter 2 when Christ makes a whip of cords and drives people out of the temple. Whether he hit them with the cords or just struck the ground for intimidation it doesn't matter. What does matter is that despite, or even because, of His love for them, this was that only way for them to learn and for Him to do what needed to be done (purify His Father's house). You were just purifying your life with a blank slate, if I might be so bold to tell you what you were doing. I hope you can forgive me for writing that last bit so bluntly. Thank you so very much for sharing your thoughts.
Delete